Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 UDC 27 ISSN 1451-0928

ÅASOPIS
Teorijsko glasilo Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu

TEOLOÃKI

Broj 9

2

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

3

Teoloãki åasopis, broj 9, 2009. godine. Izdavaå: Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu. Adi Endrea 30, 21000 Novi Sad, Srbija. Tel: +381.(0)21.469-410 Elektronska poãta: nsts@sbb.co.rs Internet stranica: www.nsts-online.org Glavni i odgovorni urednik: prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan. Urednici: mr Nikola Kneæeviñ mr Srœan Sremac. Recenzenti: -prof. dr Heleen Zorgdrager, Ukrainian Catholic University, Ukrajina, Kerk in Actie, Holandija -prof. dr Anne-Marie Kool, Karoly Gaspar Reformed University, Budimpešta, Maðarska; -prof. dr Jasmin Miliñ, Protestantsko teoloãko uåiliãte Mihail Starin, Osijek, Hrvatska; -Kevin Steger, Ph.D. Dallas Baptist University, SAD; -Hank Kanters, D.Min. World Life Centre, Kanada; i -dr Svetislav Rajšiñ, Protestantski teološki fakultet, R. Srbija Prelom: Miloã Moravek Ãtampa: MBM-plas Tiraæ: 500 primeraka ISSN: 1451-0928 UDC: 27

Izdavanje ovog åasopisa finansiralo je Ministarstvo vera Republike Srbije u okviru projekta: "Unapreœivanje verske kulture, verskih sloboda i tolerancije".

4

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 IZ UVODNIKA PRVOGA BROJA TEOLOÃKOG ÅASOPISA

Teoloãki åasopis je godiãnjak Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, u kome se objavljuju radovi profesora i studenata, istorijski dokumenti kao i letopis rada fakulteta. Meœutim, osmiãljen je tako da uskoro moæe da preraste kategoriju godiãnjaka. Åeænja duãe mi je da vidim kako Teoloãki åasopis strategijom kvasca, nenametljivo i nezadræivo, postaje platforma teoloãkog promiãljanja ovde i sada: u naãem duhovnom i kulturnom kontekstu. Upravo ovaj i ovakav kontekst nameñe obavezu ozbiljnog pristupa i tretmana pravoslavne teoloãke misli i to u punini njene istorijske dimenzije. Kontekstualna teoloãka promiãljanja, koja ovaj åasopis priæeljkuje, opravdañe svoj pridev jedino ako budu odraæavala pluralizam hriãñanskih denominacija koji karakteriãe vojvoœansku i ãiru domañu stvarnost. Iz tog razloga, ljubazno pozivam kako pravoslavne tako i katoliåke i protestantsko/evanœeoske teologe i crkvene sluæitelje da svoja bogoslovska razmiãljanja izraze u Teoloãkom åasopisu. Pouåite nas i pouåimo se. Samo istinotraæitelji su istinski Bogotraæitelji. Prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu

. 141 PREGLEDNI RADOVI Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Komparativni pristup: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . 193 STRUÅNI RADOVI Petar Piliñ Duhovni aspekti bolesti . . . 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 5 SADRÆAJ: Reå urednika . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Savremena pastirska sluæba crkve . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: Pisani i slikani izvori . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Osnovne biblijske vere . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski Traganje za neizrecivim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the front-line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 NAUÅNI RADOVI Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Teoloãki åasopis. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 SCIENTIFIC PAPERS Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the Front-Line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Foundations of Biblical Faith . . . . . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Symbolism of the Feast of Pentakost: Written and Painted Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski The Quest for the Unspeakable . . . . . 193 PAPER IN APPLIED THEOLOGY Petar Piliñ Spiritual Aspects of Illness . . . . . . N° 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Word Forward by the Editor-in-chief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 OVERVIEW PAPERS Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Contemporary Pastoral Ministry of the Church . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Comparative Perspective: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ne samo u teoloãkom veñ i u duhovnom smislu. veñ i socioloãki. Verujem da ñe deveti broj Teoloãkog åasopisa pre svega pomoñi åitaocima u daljem razvoju teoloãkog iskustva i saznanja i joã jednom dati svoj doprinos kako celokupnom teoloãkom promiãljanju tako i nauci uopãte. jer svojim svehriãñanskim stavom doprinosi boljem hermenautiåkom pristupu svetopisamskog otkrivenja i same crkvene predaje.nauåni karakter. Na taj naåin dolazi do izraæaja i njegova ekumenska dimenzija. Upravo ovo ilustruje da Teoloãki åasopis nema samo teoloãko .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 7 Reå urednika Kao i prethodni brojevi i ovaj broj se moæe pohvaliti sadræajem koji je interdisciplinarnog karaktera.humanistiåke nauke u jednu koherentnu celinu. razvijajuñi pritom konstruktivni dijalog izmeœu istih. On ima ulogu da kultiviãe teoloãku misao uzimajuñi u obzir sve tri hriãñanske provenijencije. inkorporirajuñi tako sve druãtveno . jer svojom verskom i etniåkom ãarolikoãñu na pravi naåin oslikava i naãe druãtveno okruæenje i samim tim pridonosi izgradnji tolerantnijeg druãtva uopãte. Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ . Sagledavajuñi mesto i ulogu Teoloãkog åasopisa unutar verskog konteksta naãe zemlje moæe se slobodno reñi da je njegova uloga afirmativna.

N° 9 NAUÅNI RADOVI .8 Teoloãki åasopis.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 9 Irina Radosavqeviñ UDK 929:778. åuveni reæiser Andrej Tarkovski nastojao je da. Andrej Tarkovski pripada generaciji posleratnih reæisera koji su stvarali nakon perioda dominacije epskog stila Sergeja Ajzenãtajna u kome je montaæa predstavqala .03. veñ veãtom upotrebom onih sredstava koji su svojstveni filmu kao mediju.5Tarkovski Andrej diplomirani teolog Originalni nauåni rad Pravoslavnog bogoslovskog Primljeno: 11. veñ je nastojao da tanano sugeriãe i naznaåi ostavqajuñi tako prostor gledaocu da sam naåini pokret ka neizrecivom. a ono ãto je nevidqivo i skriveno nije pokuãavao da opisuje i prepriåava. poniruñi u tajnu postojawa sveta i åoveka.2010 umetnosti i medija Univerziteta umetnosti u Beogradu irinarados@hotmail.com Andrej Tarkovski . Duhovna dimenzija wegovih filmova nije izgraœena religioznim narativom. gledaocu pruæi priliku za jedno autentiåno duhovno iskustvo.03. emocionalne izraæajnosti likova i konstruisawa alegorijskih zagonetki iako mu je ovo posledwe åesto pripisivano. Wegov primarni ciq bio je da kamerom uhvati samu sræ æivota u svim wegovim dimenzijama.tragawe za neizrecivim Rezime Stvarajuñi svoje filmove.2010 fakulteta BUmaster teorije Prihvañeno: 15. Primatan je jak uticaj pravoslavne ikonografije i estetskih sredstava koja ona upotrebqava. Tarkovski je teæio oslobaœawu od logike linearnog narativa.

Tako.nostalghia. uæivajuñi reputaciju mraånog i opskurnog umetnika. åiji su filmovi nerazumqivi i nejasni. pisao: „Od velikog umetnika oåekujem. Iskusio je neprekidnu borbu sa cenzurom i negativnom kritikom unutar SSSR-a. 1 A B. Kuåev. ne mareñi za sagovornika. Velika je vrlina biti kadar za sluãawe i razumevawe. M..2 Realnost je ipak bila malo drugaåija. samo monolog. ozbiqan dijalog samnom kao gledaocem.10 Teoloãki åasopis.To je. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. http://www. takoœe kritiåar sovjetskog perioda. sa dubokim æaqewem moram reñi da je wegov film namewen uskom krugu gledalaca koji su dobro upoznati sa kinematografijom“. film o kome ne mogu govoriti. piãe: „Film Andreja Tarkovskog je filmska ispovest. M. Ali.. razgovara sam sa sobom“. Stvaralaãtvo Tarkovskog je nailazilo na topao i dubok prijem kod odreœenog dela publike i taj odgovor publike ga je hrabrio da istraje uprkos svim teãkoñama. u kome autor. Tarkovski je ukazivao i na wene nedostatke pokuãavajuñi da pronaœe prisniji i liåniji naåin izraæavawa u filmskoj umetnosti. a za ispovest je zaista potrebna hrabrost. originalne. Metalnikov. je o filmu Ogledalo. zato ãto ga æivim. ali uvek duboke misli. Radnik u lewingradskoj fabrici pisao je: „Razlog zaãto Vam piãem je Ogledalo. N° 9 osnovno izraæajno sredstvo. nakon svega.Meœutim. Ako su dvoje qudi sposbni da makar jednom 1 David Wishard. .com 2 Idem... Uvaæavajuñi veliåinu ove filmske ãkole. u ovom filmu dijaloga nema. sovjetski kritiåar. u kwizi Vajawe u vremenu on navodi delove pisama koje su mu slali poãtovaoci wegovog rada. wihovi prirodni neuspesi. prvi princip qudskih odnosa: spremnost da se qudi razumeju i da im se oproste nenamerne greãke.

5 Robert.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 11 iskuse isto. 1989. bilo je i drugaåijih miãqewa poput onog Fredrika Xejmsona. Tarkovski je za mene najveñi. U svim nejasnostima i neodreœenostima Xejmson ne vidi zadivqujuñu 3 Andrej Tarkovski. on se kretao slobodno i sa lakoñom. 8. Osetio sam ohrabrewe i podsticaj: neko je izraæavao ono ãto sam ja oduvek æeleo da iskaæem a nisam znao kako. Bergman je za wega govorio: „Moje otkrivawe prvog filma Andreja Tarkovskog bilo je ravno åudu. Prometej. koji uspeva da uhvati æivot kao refleksiju. do tada. Umentiåka druæina ANonim.“3 Filmovi Tarkovskog govore o åoveku. na primer.). a sam Tarkovski status jednog od najznaåajnijih autora svih vremena. a drugi u doba elektriciteta. netrpeqiv prema bilo kakvoj alegoriji. Vajawe u vremenu. smatra da je glavni junak u svojoj dosadnoj stradalnoj usamqenosti kojom podseña na Hrista mnogo mawe privlaåan nego socijalno neprilagoœena varalica kako je prikazan u izvornom tekstu. moñi ñe da razumeju jedno drugo. onaj koji je stvorio novi jezik. Beograd. tumaåa. komentatora.com . jezik koji odgovara prirodi filma. Tragaju za istinom o æivotu. wegovom odnosu prema drugom åoveku. naãao sam se pred vratima sobe åije kquåeve. posmatra kao „otuænu religioznu priåu“ i. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. 1999. o åeæwi za apsolutnim. Tokom vremena stekli su veliki broj poãtovalaca. Åak i ako je jedan æiveo u eri mamuta. prema sopstvenim neistraæenim dubinama. nisam nikada imao. Novi Sad. svetu. 4 Marina Tarkovska (prireœ. æivot kao san. o wegovom smislu.“4 Ipak. Odjednom.nostalghia. Stalkera. Po sobi u koju sam oduvek æeleo da uœem. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). Bird. http://www. Wegova kritika5 obojena je podrugqivim odnosom prema rediteqevom „velikom misticizmu“.

potcewujuñi estetiku i strukturu wegovih filmova. Ova kritika odaje izvesnu nemoguñnost wenog autora da prodre dubqe u umetniåki diskurs Tarkovskog i da osmotri wegovo delo kao celinu. On odbacuje postojawe umetniåke autonomije Tarkovskog i wegov opus shvata samo kao izraz wegovih teorijskih postavki. Po wemu. Sam Tarkovski je bio protivnik alegorije u filmu. na pogreãnoj strani. Ipak ñe biti da u filmovima A. Za razliku od alegorije koja predstavqa formu u kojoj konaåno teæi da se u beskonaånom poniãti i ukine. Ne uspevajuñi da sagleda celinu wegovog dela. Ipak. Tako shvañen simbol . Ne prigovara toliko „religioznom sadræaju“ koliko „umetniåkoj pretencioznosti“. odnosno. „poetski film“ se svojim slikama udaqava od åiweniånog i konkretnog u oslikavawu stvarnosti afirmisawem sopstvenog ustrojstva i celovitosti. a ne samo kao religioznu alegoriju ili izraz odreœene ideologije. alegorijama i drugim stilskim figurama u kojima Tarkovski vidi opasnost od udaqavawa filma od sebe samog. simbol je beskonaåno koje se izraæava u konaånom. na æalost. zadivqen je pred wegovom sposobnoãñu da uhvati „istinu u mahovini“ i „momente u kojima elementi govore“. Xejmson odbacuje Tarkovskog kao umetnika (wegovo delo vidi kao neuspeli pokret jednog moraliste ka umetniåkom diskursu) zarad Tarkovskog kao alegoriste (mada je sam Tarkovski iskazivao nepoverewe prema alegoriji) koji je uvuåen u ideoloãki konflikt i to. N° 9 estetiku Tarkovskog veñ samo alegoriju i ideologiju.12 Teoloãki åasopis. Tarkovskog ne nalazimo jasno i nedvosmisleno iskazan ideoloãki diskurs i da se o takvom diskursu moæe govoriti samo ako se prethodno upoznati autorovi stavovi uåitaju u wegove filmove. On daje æivot metaforama. Za wega je usporenost kretawa kamere i glumaca „nepodnoãqiva za sve osim za najvernije poklonike Tarkovskog“. pretenziji na umetnost. navodno visokom umetnoãñu i duboko æali nad „trenutnim sovjetskim religioznim trendom“ koji vidi kao straãnu zarazu. Xejmson je smatrao da Tarkovski pokuãava da religiozni sadræaj svojih dela opravda.

. On ima mnogo lica i misli. U „Vajawu u vremenu“ on navodi Vjaåeslava Ivanova i wegov komentar o celovitosti umetniåkog dela koje naziva simbolom i taj navod najboqe govori o wegovom viœewu upotrebe simbola: „Simbol je istinit samo onda kada je neiscrpan i neograniåen u svojim znaåewima. ali kao sredstva za iskazivawe neiskazivog pri åemu ono ãto je upotrebqavao kao simbol nikada nije gubilo svoje bukvalno znaåewe da bi mesto ustupilo nekom drugaåijem. dok unutar filma simboli lako postaju kliãei koji ga liãavaju realnosti i æivotnosti... kada u svojoj arkani obelodawuje jezik nagoveãtaja i zbliæavawa s neåim ãto ne moæe biti objaãweno. „Umetnost åini beskonaånost dodirqivom“. 6 Andrej Tarkovski. i suoåeni sa tajnim znaåewem u wihovom totalitetu. On je oblikovan prirodnim procesom.6 Tarkovski je smatrao da film kao celina treba da predstavqa simbol i nosi znaåewe.. poput kristala. veñ disati onim åime oni diãu. govorio je. koristio je simbole. ãto je nesaopãtivo reåima... boqem i uzviãenijem znaåewu koje tek treba odgonetnuti veñ je neposredno delovalo na gledaoca gradeñi celinu i wen smisao. cit. 46. on je monada i zato po ustrojewu razliåit od kompleksnih i razloæivih alegorija. Smatrao je da svaki gledalac treba sam da doæivi film.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 13 bi se mogao povezati sa teæwom Tarkovskog da kroz prikazivawe neposredne stvarnosti iskaæe i ono beskonaåno. Ipak. da ga posmatra kao ãto se posmatraju zvezde ili more. neposredno i emocionalno.. op. Uistinu. i u svojoj najveñoj dubini ostaje nedokuåiv. parabola i poreœewa. mi smo bespomoñni“.Simboli ne mogu biti drugaåije izraæeni niti objaãweni. Nije neophodno otkriti znaåewe simbola. Ono ãto je Tarkovski æeleo da izbegne jeste nametnuto intelektualno tumaåewe svojih dela i optereñenost gledalaca tim tumaåewem.

emocionalnoj izra7 8 Robert Bird. odnosno. 71. poput Bresona odbacivao psihologizaciju likova. Svojim studentima je govorio : „Nije moguñe fotografisati stvarnost. tvorca sveta koji gotovo postaje stvarnost jer u wemu nema niåeg ãto bi se pokazalo veãtaåkim. Kod wega je sve izbrisano skoro do taåke neizraæajnosti. 73. namernim ili nasilnim u odnosu na jedinstvo.14 Teoloãki åasopis. Sami glumci sa kojima je radio svedoåe da je wegovo reæirawe uglavnom bilo ograniåeno na pozicirawe u prostoru i pokret. dok je uporno izbegavao da sa wima razgovara o onome ãto bi trebalo da misle ili oseñaju. Nalazimo joã jednu potvrdu sliånosti wegovog stila sa sredwevekovnim sakralnim slikarstvom. 2008. tako. to jednostavno znaåi da ne radi i niãta osim toga. a to je Andrej Tarkovski“. N° 9 Poqski reæiser Kãiãtof Kiãlovski je jednom prilikom rekao da ukoliko je na filmu prikazan upaqaå koji ne radi. To je izraæajnost koja je dovedena do takve preciznosti i lakonizma da prestaje da bude izraæajna. Smatrao je da je apsurdno traæiti objektivnu istinu te da postoje samo liåne istine. ravni åudu. Reaktion Books.7 Sliku koja je plod liånog doæivqaja i opaæawa stvarnosti i wenih razliåitih dimenzija. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Ibid. London. ali je bio svestan da je to u apsolutnom smislu nemoguñe i da je film ipak iluzija.“8 Tarkovski je. Breson je bio wegov veliki uåiteq: „U svojim filmovima Breson se pretvara u demijurga. ikonom koja se odupirala linearnoj perspektivi. „U posledwih nekoliko godina samo je jedan reæiser uspeo da ostvari åudo. Tarkovski je æeleo da kamerom uhvati sræ æivota i stvarnosti. . ali da su retki trenutci u kojima reæiser uspe da postigne joã neko znaåewe. moæete jedino stvoriti wenu sliku“.

ruska Golgota. utisaka i raspoloæewa. snova i maãte. Zanimqivo da se kod wega javqa i prisutnost istih likova na dva razliåita mesta u jednom istom neprekinutom kadru (ãto je. realnog åoveka. åak je za film Andrej Rubqov bio kritikovan zbog naturalizma pojedinih scena. Donatas Banionis je govorio da se åesto oseñao kako prosto pozira. Ili scene Ivanovih snova ili señawa nasuprot realistiånim slikama rata u Ivanovom detiwstvu. ali ne izraæajan. u Andreju Rubqovu. ali se na wemu ne zaustavqa. ponovo. Jedinstven. svojstveno ikoni). ãto je. glumac bi trebalo da prikaæe obiånog. subjektivni svet misli i oseñawa. Tarkovski je postavio temeqe i za tehnike upotrebqene u narednim filmovima. pogled ka unutra. Wega interesuje i druga. Trebalo bi da bude autentiåno jedinstven. Kao i figure na ikoni. señawe. Vrhunac izraæajnosti jeste da bude na svom odgovarajuñem mestu. wegova nevidqiva. kao ãto su let balonom. svet onakav kakav je kad proœe kroz prizmu qudskog liånog doæivqaja. Realistiåne scene æivota sredwevekovne Rusije su u Rubqovu izmeãane sa scenama izmeœu sna i jave. Reãavawe odnosa izmeœu ikone i filma. Marija i deca u sceni señawa u Nostalgiji ãto je postignuto jednostavnim pretråavawem glumaca sa jednog na drugo mesto kad izaœu iz kadra. Po Tarkovskom. sve izgledalo drugaåije. duhovna dimenzija. a ne glumi. sneg u crkvi. . Ogoqeni realizam dostupan qudskom oku za wega nije kraj priåe o onome ãto æeli da zabeleæi. unutraãwa realnost. ka subjektivnoj percepciji dogaœaja je ono ãto proæima sve wegove filmove. javqawe mrtvog Teofana. jedna od karakteristika ikone. likovi Tarkovskog mogu izgledati bezizraæajno dok se ne sagleda bogatstvo razliåitih pogleda uperenih na wih sa svih moguñih strana. Tarkovski insistira na realizmu. ali je na kraju. da gledalac ne primeti da on zapravo glumi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 15 æajnosti likova i alegorijskim zagonetkama. slike i narativa. takoœe. na primer. San. U wegovim slikama meãaju se naturalistiåko i numunozno.

16 Teoloãki åasopis. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. a dogaœaji iz tri razliåita vremenska perioda prikazana izmeãano. takoœe.nostalghia. wemu veoma draga. Tarkovski upotrebqava i isprekidan i nepodudaran zvuk stvarajuñi tako auru „ontoloãke neodreœenosti“: “Åini se kao da sama Priroda poåiwe åudesno da govori. Smewivawe dugaåkog kadra i brze montaæe. jambiåki pentametar. Tarkovski se seña da je dvadeset puta restruktuirao film pre nego ãto ga je zavrãio. Boju je. åak monohtromnu. veñ slagawe slika u procesu asocijacija kao ãto to åine pesnici. odnosno varijacije u ritmu samog filma. autor jednog eseja 9 Robert Bird.com . ãto je vidno u Stalkeru. Pod pojmom poetskog u filmu nije podrazumevao teæwu ka lirizmu i romantici.“9 Zvukovi kod Tarkovskog se neobjaãwivo pojavquju i nestaju åesto varajuñi uho i u pogledu svog izvora. stvarawe slike raspoloæewa i atmosfere kako je to åinila. najboqi primer nelinearnog narativa predstavqa film Ogledalo u kome je potpuno napuãten vremenski kontinuitet. http://www. dok je Rubqov sniman u crno-beloj tehnici. Ipak. Uglavnom koristi ograniåenu paletu boja. koristio kao jako izraæajno sredstvo da prenese odreœeno raspoloæewe ili emociju. haiku poezija. na primer. a konfuzna i haotiåna simfonija wenog mrmqawa neprimetno prelazi u istinsku muziku. Auditivni pejzaæ filma kao da postoji paralelno sa vizuelnim i kao da dolazi sa nekog drugog mesta. Andrea Trpin. takoœe se mogu razumeti kao jedno poetsko sredstvo buduñi da podseñaju na poeziju. Ivanovo detiwstvo je bio pravi skok u evoluciji ruskog filma svojom narativnom strukturom zasnovanoj na asocijativnim vezama i tananim prelazima izmeœu sna i jave. N° 9 I u teoriji i u praksi Tarkovski je nastojao da se oslobodi logike linearnog narativa i pribliæi logici poezije.

10 Takav zvuk destabilizuje. London. Robert Bird.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 17 na temu zvuka u filmovima Andreja Tarkovskog. sneg. Kada je reå o prostoru Andreja Tarkovskog11. Reaktion Books. åini da ono ãto je sasvim ugodno i celovito odjednom izgleda strano i zbuwujuñe. a ponekad se åini i da ga uzvraña. 51-69. Time Tarkovski otvara prostor gledaocu da zaviri u numinoznu stvarnost ili bar. trava. 2008.) .. kuña ili dom i crkva ili svetiliãte. modernih hotela i ogoqenih hotelskih soba. U wegovim filmovima dominiraju priroda. kao ãto se filmski likovi bore sa sopstvenom sposobnoãñu da imaju veru“. postavi pitawe ontoloãke sigurnosti. . a wihovu postojanost remeti wihovo åesto neoåekivano pojavqivawe. Snimajuñi Nostalgiju nije æeleo da je prikaæe turistiåki kroz najlepãa mesta i predele. bare. Priroda – drveñe. moæe biti da se radi i o pravoslavnom etosu qubavi prema tvorevini kao daru Boæijem koji trpi posledice åovekovog pada i åeka da bude obnovqena u svoj svojoj lepoti u 10 11 Idem. a stranci unutra. veñ da da prikaz Italije kroz poglede svojih likova ãto je ukquåivalo i slike nepoznatih ruãevina. na ivici panteizma. on je uvek liåan jer ga oblikuje qudski pogled. Svako od tih prostora se razlikuje po osobenom vizuelnom naponu koji nastaje ukrãtawem pogleda kamere sa pogledima likova i gledalaca. Crkvu odlikuju åvrsti uspravni stubovi i neæni lukovi. Ipak. voda (kiãa. Nikada nije samo dekorativan ili informativan.je najåeãñe prikazana kao plodna i æiva. da li da veruju u priåu. potoci.. ukazuje da wegova „upotreba dvosmislenog zvuka uvlaåi publiku u borbu. Prirodu predstavqa jednostavan tok koji upija qudski pogled. Kuña poseduje prozore kroz koje stanari gledaju napoqe. koja se nikad do kraja ne razreãava. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema.

gotovo uvek prikazuje kao dañu na selu. ona kao da vidi. U Stalkeru. razume. Andrej Rubqov obiluje predstavama crkvi. tatarsko razvaqivawe ulaza u crkvu i ulazak u wu na 12 13 Poslanica Rimqanima 8. U Solarisu i Ærtvi ona je i mesto nerazreãenih porodiånih tenzija. U Ivanovom detiwstvu. bunker u jednom trenutku podseti na crkvu tokom liturgije.18 Teoloãki åasopis. Åesti motivi u kuñi su åaãe. oltar sa hlebom. nakon Katasonikove smrti. a Ærtva kuñom koja nestaje u vatri. priroda je zagaœena i nepredvidiva.22. simbolom novog æivota. a svetiliãte s åuvenom Madonom del Parte na wenom poåetku. Kolin u crkvi pali cigaretu izmeœu ostataka freske Bogorodice i razbuktalog plamena. . Na samom poåetku seqak Jefim i wegov skok sa vrha crkve. krstovi. U Ogledalu i Nostalgiji ona se javqa samo u snovima punim åeæwe za povratkom u dom. zvono. Rim. plamen. kwige. åipka. 21. Kuñu. prosuto mleko. 8. crkva belih zidova koja åeka da bude oslikana. Katedrala u nadrealnom pejzaæu koji podseña na De Kirikove slike pojavquje se na kraju Nostalgije. Tarkovski. Nostalgija zavrãava kuñom u nestvarnom pejzaæu unutar katedrale. sastradava i raduje se zajedno sa åovekom („Jer znamo da sva tvar zajedno uzdiãe i tuguje do sada“)13. dok je u Nostalgiji i Ærtvi pomalo zapostavqena da bi se Ærtva zavrãila scenom olistavawa suvog drveta kao simbolom ispuwene nade i procvetale vere. Kolin razbija tu atmosferu besnim zvowewem zvona. dolazi do izvesne promene. N° 9 punoñi („Jer æarkim iãåekivawem tvorevimna oåekuje da se jave sinovi Boæiji“ da bi se „oslobodila od robovawa propadqivosti“)12 Wegova priroda je gotovo slovesna. Kasnije. U Ivanovom detiwstvu Ivan ulazi na vrata u kuñu koja je skoro potpuno uniãtena kao ãto åini i Domeniko u Nostalgiji. a zanimqivo je da unutraãwost kuñe åesto ostaje neodrediva kao da prostorije mewaju svoj poloæaj.

na æalost. ciq celokupne umetnosti je da objasni. iskupqewa i ærtve. jedini drugi put je. otuœenosti i zajedniãtva. stradawa i zla. onaj koji vodi duhovnom 14 Andrej Tarkovski. jeste da napravi bar jedan korak ka duhovnom savrãenstvu. po wemu. padova i pokajawa. Liãena duhovnosti umetnost odgaja u sebi svoju vlastitu tragediju. Muåe ih pitawa vere i smisla. za izmirewem. a ono bar da se upita i da drugima postavi pitawe. Ako ne da objasni. Wegovi junaci su najåeãñe oni koji tragaju. po wemu imao posebnu misiju i posebnu odgovornost. Ciq umetnosti je da kroz potres i katarzu uåini qudsku duãu prijemåivom za dobro i da joj priliku za jedno autentiåno duãevno iskustvo. zaãto åovek æivi i koji je smisao wegovog postojawa. Tarkovski piãe: „Mene privlaåi åovek koji je spreman da sluæi viãem ciqu. instrument wegovog saznavawa.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 19 kowima. iznad svega. ona ipak. raœa i utvrœuje tamo gde postoji nezasita åeæwa za duhovnim kao idealom. „Umetnost je sredstvo pripajawa sveta åoveku. . tako da najmawe ãto åovek moæe da uradi tokom svog æivota. Zato je i video izvesnu religioznu dimenziju same umetnosti. putuju u nepoznate svetove svog unutraãweg biña. åeznu za Biñem. i crkva kao mesto epifanije – Teofanovo javqawe sa onoga sveta. cit. Tarkovski je smatrao da postoji analogija izmeœu potresa izazvanog umetniåkim delom i onog koje potiåe iz åisto religioznog iskustva. ukquåen u putawu åovekovog kretawa prema onom ãto nazivamo apsolutnom istinom“. Jer. Umetnik mora da teæi istini i ma koliko ta istina bila straãna. Za Tarkovskog. koji ne æeli – ili åak ne moæe – da pristane na opãte prihvañenu svetsku ‘moralnost’. åovek koji prepoznaje da smisao qudskog postojawa leæi. za istinskim postojawem. u borbi protiv zla u nama samima. iscequje.14 Umetnost se. op. kako sebi tako i onima oko sebe. a sam umetnik je.

sami u wu zarone i suoåe se sa sobom i sa onostranim.16 Kao dubok i odgovoran umetnik. op.. veru qubav. 206. istanåanim oseñajem za upotrebu formalnih elemenata filma i narativa. unutraãwim tragawima. molitvu. transcendentno. veñ samo nenametqivo poziva na susret i opãtewe i. Ono ãto sawa i ono åemu se nada.. Andrej Tarkovski je na ekran umeãno prenosio duboko proæivqenu istinu åovekovog postojawa u ovom svetu dotiåuñi se i wegove duhovne dimenzije.. one koji na taj poziv odgovore. Stil Andreja Tarkovskog religiozni diskurs ne objavquje i ne natura. åesto uprkos greãnosti samog pesnika“. uzvodi ka jednom neizrecivom i mistiånom iskustvu. boæansko. nagon govori wegovom telu koji pokret ñe ga spasiti. rvawem sa æivotom i wegovim smislom te su tako wegovi filmovi i svojim narativom upleteni u reãavawe neizreciva tajne postojawa ulazeñi tako u prostor duhovnog i religioznog. „nadu.. 237 . govorio je. a naãe svakodnevno iskustvo i sveopãti pritisak da se povinujemo åini izbor ovog drugog puta isuviãe lakim..20 Teoloãki åasopis. Umetnik je takoœe upravqen nekom vrstom nagona i wegovo delo produæava tragawe åoveka za onim ãto je veåno. „Umetnost potvrœuje ono najboqe u åoveku“. Kada je neko ko ne zna da pliva baåen u vodu. ãto ga.“15 Wegovi likovi su zaokupqeni sopstvenim duhovnim krizama. Andrej Tarkovski. N° 9 propadawu. cit. uzvodi do samih vrata te tajne ostavqajuñi ih da poput Stalkera. 15 16 Andrej Tarkovski. Za wega su svet i åovek neizrecive tajne i on svoje gledaoce.. po naãem miãqewu. cit. op. åini autorom koji istanåano i s merom gradi duhovnu dimenziju filma.

Robert.nostalghia. 1989. Umetniåka druæina Anonim. Beograd.com . Vajawe u vremenu. 2008. Reaktion Books. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). Wishard. (prireœ.com Tarkovski. Tarkovska.). Andrej. Bird. Novi Sad.nostalghia. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. http://www. 1999. Robert. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. Prometej.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 21 Citirana dela: Bird. London. David. Marina. http://www. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity.

N° 9 Resume Andrei Tarkovsky was a director who created his films with desire to penetrate deeply into the secret of human existence and give his audience the opportunity for an authentic spiritual experience. Tarkovsky tended to free his films from the logic of linear narratives. The spiritual dimension of his films is not established on religious narrative. presenting the invisible without useless describing and retelling. .22 Teoloãki åasopis. but through subtle suggestions and hints in order to give an opportunity to his audience to make an effort to catch a glimpse of the invisible realities by themselves. His main effort was to catch the essence of life in all its dimensions. emotional expressiveness of characters and allegorical constructions (though he was often criticized as too allegorical) showing strong influence of orthodox iconography and its esthetic means. but on skillful use of basic elements of film.

Univerzitet u Beogradu) (nesic. bogoslovqa i crkvene poboænosti.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 23 UDK 281. tj. bogoslovqa kao i samih hriãñana za uvek – novog i neponovqivog Gospoda Isusa Hrista. otvorenosti Crkve.01. do krize razdvojenosti i ãizofrenije izmeœu Liturgije. i daje jedan ãiroki moguñi naåin da se oni prevaziœu ili makar poånu da se prevazilaze i to pomoñu koncepta „dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. Liturgije.2010 Prihvañeno: 23.02. zatvorenost za „drugaåijost“. itd. Kroz krizu savremenog pravoslavnog bogoslovqa u Srbiji i ãire. wegovih uåewa.com) Savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve Rezime Priloæeni tekst predstavqa pokuãaj analize savremenog stawa „pastirske sluæbe pravoslavne Crkve“ i to pre svega iz pravoslavno – bogoslovskog i kritiåkog ugla. pojmova i savremenih interpretacija.2010 Lazar Neãiñ. zacementirana Liturgija. za eshatoloãku Evharistiju. relevantno i aktuelno bogoslovqe Crkve. a samim tim i preutemeqenu pastirsku sluæbu Crkve.lazar@gmail. romantiåno – epski jezik Pravoslavqa. . Tekst dijagnosticira taåke u kojima se takve anomalije pojavquju: nerelevantno bogoslovqe. (Pravoslavni bogoslovski fakultet.96:252 Primljeno 19.

Bogoslovqe je. definicija. nije samo klasiåan „govor i nauk o Boæanstvu“.Bogoslovqe i pastirska sluæba Crkve u XXI veku Sredstva pojmovnog miãqewa su suviãe siromaãna da bi izrazila veånu beskonaånost Emil Sioran Ãta je bogoslovqe? Ãta bi moglo da bude bogoslovqe? Da li je to skup sistema. „ispravnost“ naãih stavova.24 Teoloãki åasopis. Bogoslovqe je nikad – do – kraja – ispriåana priåa o onima koji se qube. N° 9 1. Bogoslovqe je upitanost. uvek – neponovqivo sazreva. veåito epikleptiåko .. pre svega. Bogoslovqe. „ortodoksnost“ naãe hriãñanske pravovernosti pred „bezboænim svetom“. pokuãaj neopisivog opisa susreta. æivota. neãto mnogo „drugaåije“ od svega ãto smo dosada åuli o wemu?! Bogoslovqe svagda jeste opis. deãava. dogaœa. otkrivawe neotkrivenog. neki susret moæda? Jedno neponovqivo otkrivawe „drugosti“ Boga. sveta. riziåno – bezdano. izreka i poslovica o Bogu pothrawenih u muzejskoj zbirci Crkve koje åuåe u fasciklama na policama kabineta i åekaju da budu izvaœene u trenucima kada „ i Crkva treba da kaæe svoje“?! Ili je bogoslovqe neãto drugo. moguñnost nemoguñeg. jedno integralno obuhvatawe svih åovekovih razmiãqawa. Zacementirano. doæivqaja. veåno – biñevno – otkrivajuñe. i qubav – Boæiju stalno – primajuñe. . uvek – iznova – okuãano. Bogoslovqe se zbiva. iskaza. suæivota. niti iãta ãto potseña na neãto dato i zavrãeno. „opravdawe“ za crkvenu samoizolaciju? Ili je bogoslovqe neãto „drugo“. opitno. åoveka. dakle. Da li je bogoslovqe tu da „osigura“ naãu poboænost. niti „definicija Boga“. qubavi izmeœu Svete Trojice i åoveka.. prizivajuñe.

zapisa. åekaju da vide ishod borbe bogoslovqa i Onoga koga bogoslovqe treba. Bogoslovqe nema sve odgovore na sva pitawa.2 Pogreãno je uverewe o bogoslovqu kao åuvaru „Boæijih zakona“.. „tradicije“. pruæiñe nam moæda iznenaœujuñi uvid u ovu åiwenicu prevashodnosti Dolaska Carstva nad osiguravawem druãtveno-politiåkog æivota. Ali. sa jednom velikom razlikom. „pravoslavnih vrednosti i obiåaja“. tekstova. konvencionalnog i nominalnog „hriãñanstva“ samodovoqnog od svojih „dostignuña“. samo bogoslovqe se baca u bezdan moguñnosti. itd. u samosigurnosti. patriotizma. jer se ono bavi Onim koji krãi zakone. Jedinom moguñnoãñu koja nam je joã ostala u savremenom svetu. moguñnost gledawa „drugih“. ali i moguñnost tragiånog neodnosa sa „drugima“. Jedinom „misijom“ koju Crkva moæe danas pruæiti. 3 Temeqno istraæivawe ranih hriãñanskih molitvi. 46 2 Treba iznova promisliti stare fraze prema kojima: „Vera ima odgovore na sva pitawa“. Bogoslovqe je ono evharistijski – epikleptiåko i qubavno – åeæwivo nadajuñe – se – iãåekivawe i neumoqivi vapaj: „Doœi Gospode“!3 Bogoslovqe je uznemiravawe onog nekrofilskog. „porodice“. itd. jer se ono time ni ne bavi. „Sveti Oci su odgovorili na sva pitawa“. i to posebno kada znamo da danas i nije baã sve tako jednostavno i lako.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 25 Bogoslovqe nije odgovor na „dilemu Boga“! Bogoslovqe je i samo u dugaåkom redu nauka koje „muåi Bog“. bezdan neotkriveni. tradicije. Razlikom liånog qubavnog susreta! Razlikom onog Jevanœelskog: „Doœi i vidi“1. Dok ostale nauke sa distance. ãto je danas zakon postojawa. mewa obiåaje. Bogoslovqe je rizik. rizikujuñi sve do samog svog biña. Bogoslovqe „nema gde glavu prikloniti“. ni u bogoslovqu ni u æivotu. „U Pismu su svi odgovori“. . „druãtvenih i veånih vrednosti“.. uvodi 1 Jn 1. naæalost.

koliko åesto smo svedoci da dotiånu reå „novo“ shvatamo samo u hronoloãko – istorijskom kontekstu. dogaœajno – novo.. leåi. itd. dolazeñe – novo. Bogoslovqe je zato i tragiåno. Ãta zapravo znaåi „novi æivot“. kao jedan preævakani i nerealni termin u koji i sami malo verujemo. tj. saborskih. Ona osposobqava. bogosluæbenih. ne novog kao modno-zanimqivog. tj. davao milostiwu – toliko ñe mi se vratiti u svetu gde pobeœuje idealna bezpristrasna pravda). 1 – 14 5 Ali opet.). za åim åeznemo. N° 9 haos u harmoniju. u to „rvawe sa Bogom“. åemu se nadamo. to tek iznova treba promisliti i proæiveti. Jedinog Novog. itd. Koji gazi po smeñu logike ovog sveta4. kul. veåno – novo. novo je samo ono istinsko uvek – novo. Ono se ne moæe sastojati samo iz „utemequjuñih tekstova“ (svetopisamskih. Novo je ono ãto dolazi. tj. Jn 1. novost. otaåkih. . problema i moguñih razjaãwewa. ono ãto iskamo. ono ãto prizivamo. Mora takoœe biti jasno kako produæiti ono ãto su „utemequjuñi“ tekstovi 4 Mt 5. a sve u prostoru „novog æivota“. fensi. Hrista. istorijskih. 21 – 44. neoåekivano – novo. Bogoslovqe je uvek novo! Ali. sigurnosti i statistike (tipa: koliko sam postio. a ne kao „svagda – neponovqivo – novo“. mrtvu floskulu. itd. kao „jednom – davno – novo“. neponovqivo – novo. Pastirska sluæba Crkve predstavqa tek jedan „uvod“ kojim se åovek uspravqa i upuãta u taj rizik odnosa. u Crkvi5.26 Teoloãki åasopis. trendi. ãto åekamo.ali to je tek poåetak. dakle novo kao iãåekujuñe – nadawe i stalno – prizivajuñe – primawe Onog Novog. svagda – novo.. Novina. molio se. nego kao od-smrti-izbavqenog i ne-viãe-u-smrti-okonåavajuñeg. jer ne pruæa farisejsku sladuwavost morala. jer ubija svako naãe sebence. Bogoslovska misao zahteva otvoreni horizont tema. in. Koliko puta samo koristimo kovanicu „novi æivot“ kao obiånu..

a pritom nemati potrebu za prizivajuñim – oæivaqavawem istih. Mestu koje je Tamo. iskustvom. Zato ona treba da bude osloboœena svakog kopirawa u korist interpretacije... tj. s druge strane? Da li takvo bogoslovqe polako eutanizira savremeno hriãñanstvo?) Bogoslovqe je hermeneutika susreta izmeœu Svete Trojice i Åoveka. Evharistijom. starih hriãñanskih tekstualnih svedoåanstva. viãe je nego opasno. buduñi uvek nepotpuno – prisutno i iznova – oprisutnujuñe. itd. u ãta se zapravo danas åesto pretvara kao u jedno „areheologisawe“ po tekstualnim iskopinama slavne. Mestu koje je nadnacionalno i nadteritorijalno. na polici sebequbqa kao kakav lek protiv neistomiãqenika. Imajmo u vidu da ni sami sveti oci nisu odgovorili na sva pitawa!!! . praviti. ne prima. ustvari postaje pravi otrov za telo i polako ga usmrñuje. „obiåajima i starim praksama“. Poloæiti svoju nadu jedino u ispravnost istorijskih tekstova na kojima poåiva danaãwe hriãñanstvo. otaåke proãlosti. ali daleke. Samo iz tog Tamo – eshatoloãkog mi ga moæemo prizvati. askezom. ma koliko dobra i koristna bila. Bivajuñi uvek Tamo. ujeziåavati. hermeneutika uniãtewa smrti. idr. Ono nas liãava samodopadne sigurnosti.. Ono nas liãava uspavanosti. i to one liåno – hermeneutiåke. buduñi da se u – nesigurnosti 6 Npr. æivotnost. kovawem novih reåi. Mestu koje se neprestano – gradi i Koje iznova ikoniãe i ono ãto zovemo Crkva. ne funkcioniãe. muåeniãtvom. Da li se analogno isto to deãava i onom bogoslovqu koje nema snage da svari „teæinu i ozbiqnost“. Pisma. u naãem sebiånom xepu. udomqeno na Drugom Mestu. Bogoslovqe nije samo „tumaåewe“ Svetih Otaca.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 27 uåinili6. s jedne strane i tragiku savremenog æivota. tekstova. Mestu koje je Carstvo Boæije. ono nas na jedan divan i smireni naåin liãava moguñnosti da ga dræimo u nekim naãim „riznicama bogoslovqa“. „predawima“. (Poznato je da hrana. itd. æivim susretom. ali koja se dobro „ne vari“. Bogoslovqe je uvek Tamo.

æivota koji se „pre groba veñ nalazi u Vaskrsewu9“. osluãkivawa. tj. postom. to je parodija istine.. Bogoslovqe se „mesi“7 i unosi tamo gde mu je i mesto.28 Teoloãki åasopis. str. 7 8 Pokajawem. Pokuãavajuñi da pravdawima. gresima. tj. forsirawem „pravoslavnog naåina æivota“ (!) „zaobiœemo“ susret sa Drugim. nepokajawem. Setimo se samo o. u Liturgiju. od onog straãnog iskustva neprisutnosti Drugog. Hristov æivot u nama. poredak. plaãeñi se da ñe nam moæda saopãtiti neãto neoåekivano. dijaloga. nespremnoãñu. Neliturgijsko bogoslovqe. To je Mesto razgovora. „jeretiåno“ åak. tragizam. Evharistija i bogoslovqe u taj ‘naåin æivota’ unose probleme. Mesto izbavqewa prostora i vremena od veånog neprisustva biña. pre svega u Dogaœaju najerosnijeg. najistinitijeg sjediwewa sa Wim. savetovawa. ono Neoåekivano. najæivotnijeg. æivotom qubavi i ærtve. ono Drugo.. svim onim ãto zovemo askeza ili podvig. 384). mesto koje poraœa novo biñe æivota. Mesto na kome je „sve neãto drugo“. Liturgija je najprirodnije Mesto na kome i u kome se odigrava Dogaœaj Dolazak Drugog. Priåeãña. nije åak ni zanimqiva misao. Lestviånik. zakone i „pravoslavnost naãeg naåina æivota“. zapitanosti. Mesto zajedniåkog spaãavawa sveta i biña od smrti. neãto od åega bi morali da mewamo naãu zacementiranu ispravnost. onaj Dogaœaj Dolaska Drugog koji jedini moæe da ga donese Ovde. najbitnijeg. u Crkvu i za Crkvu i Crkvi. u koje åesto upadamo8. tragawe.Aleksandra Ãmemana: „ Jer Sveta Tajna jeste eshatoloãka i kao takva se ne uklapa u ‘naåine æivota’. 1998: 45 9 . N° 9 – vapi za wim i u – besmislu – svakodnevnice – traæi ono Tamo. borbu-oni sve vreme ugroæavaju statiånost ‘naåina æivota’ (citat preuzet iz: Naã æivot u Hristu. tj. molitvom.

ãta sve ove reåi i izrazi nama danas znaåe? Ãta åoveku 21. bivajuñi liturgijsko i epikleptiåko.sasvim Ovde. veka one govore. ili dara bez kalkulacije. proæeta.. Da blagodarimo. da me vrate u æivot. koji neprestano iznova Dolazi. Æivota koji Dolazi.. Ali. osmiãqena „otvorenoãñu Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. Bogoslovqe je blagodarewe. EKV Sva naãa promiãqawa u ovom poglavqu. takoœe i Dar10.prisutno neponovqivo – neoåekivano . i bez duga koji prethodi. i onim istim „Dolaskom Jedinog 10 Æak Derida ( Jacques Derrida ) ñe opisati ekonomiju dara kao naåin razmene gde se namiruje raåun: dar je uistinu dar onda kada se poklawa bez oåekivawa da se uzvrati. tj.sada ali ne . buduñi do Dolaska Drugog Tamo kao veñ . koji dolazeñi – donosi. „Nova Tvar“. . Deridina teorija dara kao da nastoji da se pribliæi tajni Hristove ærtve. Novo Jelo i novo Piñe. Blagodarewe Onome Kome mi jedino to i moæemo. daruje. Trpeza Carstva koje je veñ . biñe nadahnuta.oprisutwewe „slatke“ Hrane i Piña besmrtnosti. Darovawe buduñeg æivota. hermeneutiãu? 2. poklawa.Kriza pojmova – kritiåki pristup nadahnut „personalistiåkom ontologijom“ Nisu dovoqne reåi. kao i celini rada. takoœe apsolutnog dara. iznenaœuje davawem. ono „Drugo“. Novi i neprestani Dar qubavi i slobode kojim se grobovi prazne od smrti. saopãtavaju.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 29 Bogoslovqe je. samo obiåne reåi.

danas Gospod Isus Hristos. æivot veåni. naziva. nerazdeqivost prirode. Carstvo Boæije. Teologija i Jezik. ali samo pod uslovom onog veñ mnogo puta ovde ponovqenog „osmiãqavajuñeg – prizivawa“ Novog. Vaskrsewe. spasewe. kenoza. npr: • Stari pojmovi priliåe vremenu kada su nastali: Kako objasniti sebi i svetu pojmove poput: jednosuãtnost. Evharistija. idioma i ostalog? Jesu li ovo samo stare reåi. Hrista“. Takoœe. Jedinorodni. seña li se neko joã ãta je to Sveta Trojica? Ãta nama danas znaåe Crkva. Beograd. za nas. Ovo je naã hermeneutiåki kquå kojim pokuãavamo da otvorimo vrata problema. molitva. predawskog. pa tek onda da ukaæe na brvna i u ostalim oåima. naåin postojawa. Dolazeñeg. imena. reåi. stvarawe sveta iz niåega. Hriãñanska misao. æeqa za ãto „monaãkijim i manastirskijim“ naåinima åekawa Dolaska 11 Sjajna studija za razmatrawe ovog problema: Stilijan Papadopulos. Ko je. Bogoslovqe je previãe zarobqeno u svoj istorijski jezik. crkvena terminologija iz proãlosti vredna areheoloãkog prouåavawa. post. Pogledajmo kakav je jezik bogoslovqa danas11. i ostale „temeqne“ pojmove hriãñanskog uåewa? • Usahle forme crkvenog æivota ne mogu se analagno lepiti na savremenost: Æeqa za ãto autentiånijim æivqewem ranog. . ipostas. duhovnost. imenica. naivne bajke? Ãta moæe savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve danas sa svim ovim hitnim pitawima? Pre svega. podvig? Ãta nama predstavqa åitava enciklopedija hriãñanskih termina. tj. Donoseñeg -Neoåekivanog i Buduñeg. ikonomija. prvo da „izvadi brvno iz oka svoga“. mora da bude iskrena sama sa sobom i u najboqem asketsko – otaåkom i jevanœelskom duhu.30 Teoloãki åasopis. 1998. N° 9 Novog i Drugog. logosi biña. otaåkog. pravoslavnog hriãñansva je viãe nego za pohvalu. ãta danas znaåi reå Bog.

biñe dovoqni i naåini da se u qudsku i æivotnu svakodnevnicu udahne sveæ vazduh Onoga Koji „diãe gde hoñe“. a posebno sa onim sasvim Drugim. tj. Rijeka. odnosno tamo gde je ono „neproblematiåno“. Do tada. problema. tj. „Boæijom pravdom i promislom“ i zatvarawem u iste (jer se u takvim apstrakcijima jedino oseña sigurnim). „umetniåko – vrednosno“. police. Iako je istraæivawe starih problema neophodno. mrtvo!12 Hrabro suoåavawe sa rugobama ovog sveta tek predstoji. ) . U hriãñansko – Iako postoji obiqe literature za ovaj problem. • Problemi sa kojima se bogoslovqe suoåava su bezvremeni i nerelevantni danas: Veñ pomenuto bavqewe „istorijom bogoslovqa“ tj. „zanimqivo“. za obiåan svet koji ostaje van tog supermen molitvenog prostora. galerije.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 31 Hristovog takoœe moæe imati svoju zdravu primenu samo pod uslovima da „nekako“ iznaœemo naåina da ceo svet strpamo u manastire i peñine. mi zapadamo u oåitu nerelevantnost pred svetom. ono ipak danas ne moæe da bude primarno. „druãtveno – politiåki – prilagodqivo“. bacaju ga u fioke. 12 . nakaznosti åovekove svakodnevnice. i to onim mestima gde se govori o neidentitetu i nerelevantnosti savremenog hriãñanstva ( iz ovih misli pravoslavni bi mnogo mogli da nauåe). muzeje. vode bogoslovqe. dehumanizacije u nauci. koncertne dvorane. tj. isti je onom strahu od susreta sa drugim – bliæwim. „istoriåno – nacionalno“. ipak. Strah od sveta. mi smo posebnu paæwu poklonili mislima zapadnog teologa Jirgena Moltmana ( Jurgen Moltmann ) u wegovoj åuvenoj kwizi „Raspeti Bog“ ( Ex Libris. Strah bogoslovqa da se suoåi sa savremenim „bezboænostima“ pod izgovorom romantiånog bavqewa evharistijom. 2008. Hristom. idr. „religijsko“. problemima koji su nekada davno bili aktuelni i vaœewem istih na povrãinu savremenosti. eshatologijom.

Sarajevo. Ãahin Paãiñ. 2008. drugi ga preziru. O gramatologiji. ali jedno je sigurno: jezik bogoslovqa u krizi prebiva. tj. åoveku. terminologije i problema. Sarajevo. koje se nalazi „pre licem sveta“ najåeãñe je: • Onaj – koji – viãe – ne – dotiåe – svet • Onaj – koji – u – istoriji – prebiva • Zakopan – u – riznici – señawa • Onaj – koji – se – samo – seña – davnine • Sahrawen – u – kwigama • Zatrpan objektivacijama • Romantiåno – bajkovit • Epski – naivan Malo je prostora na kome bismo daqe mogli razraœivati ove postavke. arheoloãka iskopina koja u sebi åuva tek samo trag13 nekadaãweg – davnog odnosa sa Bogom. Jezik savremenog bogoslovqa. ali obostrano åuvaju daleko od stvarnog æivota. jedan muzejski eksponat kome se jedni dive. • Govor o Bogu. tj. samo jedan „objekt“ u rukama areheologa teologije. jezika koji – ne – dopire – dodrugog Tek ovaj problem iziskuje jednu celu studiju. Veselin Masleãa. . samo jedna „istorija teologije“ tj. za koju naæalost ovde nemamo prostora. u stvari.32 Teoloãki åasopis. . Pisawe i razlika. tj. 13 Za pojam „traga“ u savremenoj filosofiji videti: Æak Derida. N° 9 pravoslavnom taboru takvog viteza – borca joã uvek åekamo da se pojavi. Ona je. svetu odvija se u okviru nekada – davnog – arhaiånog jezika. jedna recipirana istorija teologisawa. istorija razvoja teoloãke misli. Naãe bogoslovqe je. ali i hriãñanstva. danas.

rada. i ostale „duhovne“ radwe åiniti. videti u: Kopiñ.18 Setimo se da svaka utopija tovari obaveze na buduñnost. itd. ali ne –joã . Indiana University Press.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 33 Bogoslovqe. dotiåe se ovih tema u svom genijalnom radu “Remnants of Auschwitz”. 15 Œani Vatimo (Giani Vattimo). izvijawem napred i naviãe (dakle kao svo u kretawu i 14 Reå-kovanica za åitav jedan sistem åovekove misli posle objave „smrti Boga“. odsustva smisla. pokreñe iznova ovu temu u svojoj najnovijoj kwizi: “ The Weakness of God – Theology of Event”. kao stalno – dolazeñe. Zone Books. moliti se i postiti. italijanski filozof i profesor na Torinskom univerzitetu. dovode nas u pitawe pred reåima Hristovim: „O eurwn thn yuchn auton apolesei autin. 1999. New York. ameriåki filosof religije. ima prizvuk nelagodnosti u svetu zalivenog nihilizmom. odgovornosti. svetu „posle Auãvica17“?! Bogoslovqe stalno prebiva u opasnosti od eshatoloãko – evharistijskog utopizma. i to u ovom svetu post – metafizike14 na temeqima slabe ontologije15 i Boæije slabosti16. ozbiqnosti.10. nemoñi. kai apolesas thn yuchn autou eneken emou eurnsei authn “ (Mt 10. 2008: 5 . liãavajuñi sadaãwost dinamike. 2008. dolazi i naãe preispitivawe: „Åemu joã bogoslovqe“?. kao osmiãqavajuñi – od –Tamo – nas – Ovde. danas. Upravo kao veñ – sada . Xon Kaputo (John Caputo). Naivno shvañenog kao: „mi sluæimo Liturgiju“ i „molitve i posta“. bez aktivne qubavi prema Hristu. kao kretajuñe – se – ka – nama. 16 17 Œorœo Agamben ( Giorgio Agamben ). eshatoloãko – evharistijsko bogoslovqe samim svojim naporom. Svetu i bliæwem. kretawem. podviga. Sluæiti Liturgiju. italijanski filosof i teoretiåar. 39) 18 . Na staro pitawe: „Åemu joã filosofija“?. glavni je predstavnik ove misli.

. npr..34 Teoloãki åasopis. tj. nazvan Teopoetika (Theopoethics). dodir. ali u okvirima svima-razumqivog i saopãtivog jezika svakodnevnog i sveopãteg qudskog æivota i iskustva. Poznate i razumqivo – shvatqive (srcu prijemåqive i umu osvetqavajuñe) reåi. ona ostaje izvorno svetopisamska. crkvena.19 Da li bogoslovqe zato potrebuje jedan novi jezik. kwiæevnost. tj. poput: susret. O Teopoetici viãe videti na internet prezentaciji: http://theopoetics. Bogoslovqe se. i mi pravoslavni ne smemo hladno zaobiñi postojawe jedne takve zanimqive i originalne misli. muzika. jedan jezik – susret. moæda jedan meta – jezik?. mogu ponovo pronañi mesta u opisu onog dogaœaja o kome bogoslovqe blagovesti. hriãñanska. gledawe.net/. ispuwene i ujeziåene dogaœajem dolaska Drugog. u kojoj taj isti jezik postaje mrtav za svoju svetu – se – obrañati upotrebu. Teopoetika je i nama danas poziv na jedno takvo saopãtavawe sebe svetu. qubqewe. veñ jedan jezik svakodnevnice. sasvim Drugog. ovde preobraæene. 1984: 5. Hrista. zagrqaj. film. unapred åuva sebe od pasivno – nepokretne neistine romantiåarskog eshatoloãko evharistijskog utopizma. polako pretvara ( ili se veñ pretvorilo? ) u jezik nemuãtih bogoslovskih unutraãwih trvewa. pretvara se u jedan „klovnovski jezik“. slikarstvo. 20 Veoma zanimqiva misao za pravoslavno bogoslovqe danas. N° 9 razrastawu). ne smemo zaboraviti ni kolosalnu misao rimokatoliåkog teologa Hans Urs von . S druge strane. dakle. jer predstavqa pokuãaj onog istog neizrecivog iskaza i opisa susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka.ali ne u smislu ponovne pojmovno – logiåke ograniåenosti i nemoguñnosti za izraæavawe onog liåno – qubavnog. moæe biti pokret hriãñanske teologije na Zapadu. a to je opet i opet susret Svete Trojice i Åoveka20. itd. nemajuñi „dah novog æivota“. Iako svoje izvore crpi u drugim oblastima qudskog stvaralaãtva. idr. poezija. 19 Ratzinger.

tj. Taj jezik mora iznova da najavquje. tj. jezik koji ne postoji van Drugog. Svete Trojice i onog bez – ontoloãkog – temeqa – trenutno – ovde – prisutnog. on ne postoji pre susreta. Hrista. Åoveka. i pokuãaja da daqe razradimo probleme koje smo gore naveli. u tom deãavawu.. poput Aleksandra Ãmemana (delimiåno se Baltazara (Hans Urs von Balthasar) i wegov projekat Teologike (Theologik). Jezik bogoslovqa je jezik dijaloga. i samim tim dovede do jednog diskutabilnog naåina æivota u savremenoj crkvenosti. evharistijskog i qubavno – slobodnog hriãñanskog æivota koji „zastupa“ personalistiåka ontologija). na misao savremenih bogoslova Crkve. koje Ja ima tek sa Ti. tj. . u ãta sve moæe da mutira i pseudomorfira (kada ono nije obasjano svetlom autentiånosti pomenutog). a ne zaokruæuje istinu. dolazimo do neizbeæne åiwenice i pitawa ãta sve od toga bogoslovqe nije. Bogoslovqe je jedno jeziåko pounutrewe opisa susreta izmeœu Onog sasvim Drugog.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 35 Na mesto „mrtvog jezika“ treba doñi „jezik susreta“. Teodrame (Theodramatik) i Teoloãke estetike (Theologische Ästhetik). s jedne strane. da ga odvede u krizu? Oslawajuñi se. monolog bogoslovskog jezika je smrt istog. on nastaje u osluãkivawu Duha koji dolazi. ili u ãta sve bogoslovqe moæe da se pretvori. tj. tj.Kriza crkvenog æivota (kratak pregled) U pokuãaju da odgovorimo na teãko pitawe ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude (u svetlu autentiånog crkvenog.. Wegova prava upotreba æivi jedino u tom dogaœaju. on se gradi. Koji donoseñi konstituiãe za moguñnost razgovora. 3. Ja Crkve je potpuno „bezjeziåno“ bez Ti Drugog.

a) Bogoslovqe – Liturgija – Poboænost Na predhodnim stranama smo pouãali da osvetlimo problem onoga ãto smo nazvali „ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude“.. I ne samo to. Joã tragiånije i paradoksalnije je ãto ono ne dopire ni do uãiju samih „bogoslova“ i hriãñana. Ali. N° 9 koristeñi wegovom razradom problema u okvirima ãeme Liturgija – Bogoslovqe – Poboænost). Georgorija Florovskog. Florovskog. tj. pritom åvrsto se dræeñi smernica i puteva ãto su ih savremeni pravoslavni bogoslovi (a posebno ovde aktuelna „personalistiåka ontologija“ mitropolita Zizjulasa ) odredili i dijagnosticirali. pokuãañemo da dijagnosticiramo gde. A. promislimo. Janarasa. razmatrano i moæe se nañi u mnogobrojnoj literaturi koja je svima dostupna22. Ãmemana. izbegavajuñi preteranu samodopadnost i kritiku. i to najviãe iz liånog iskustva. veñ da ga uz pomoñ pomenute „otvorenosti Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“ joã viãe proãirimo. kako. o tome je veñ mnogo toga reåeno. 2008: 21. savremenog druãtva. idr. rastegnemo. N. naravno ne pretendujuñi da zaokruæimo sistem i zakquåimo problem. Ovde ñemo postaviti 21 Ãmeman. bogoslovqe danas teãko dopire do uãiju sveta. a s druge na samo liåno iskustvo naãeg parohijskog crkvenog æivota. kada. Iz tog ugla moæemo i uoåiti wegove danaãwe nedostatke. Pre svega. Hristosa Janarasa. 22 Radovi savremenih nam bogoslova: G. H. jedna od najtragiånijih posledica krize jeste organsko razdvajawe bogoslovqa od evharistije i poboænosti. Mi æelimo da proãirimo vidik ovog problema.36 Teoloãki åasopis. nama je interesantan problem „neaktuelnosti bogoslovqa za savremeni svet“. J. od Crkve kao „zajednice svetih i zajednice u svetiwi“21. Pre svega. i ko je uzroånik krize. Rekli smo veñ da zarobqeno u svoj arhaiåni jezik. Afanasjeva. Åoveka. i dr. iznutra doæivimo i shvatimo. Majendorfa. napisano. .

Hristos. „stvarnom“. odvojeno od æivota (kao moæda i „najglavnijeg izvora“24 ) bogoslovqe se polako prazni od svojih sadræaja koji poåivaju u wegovim pojmovima. I joã: koliko moæemo susresti Svetu Trojicu u kwigama. a koliko u æivom sustretu. „tumaåewima“. Åudna je åiwenica. svimapoznatu. Pitamo se: ima li znaåajnijeg. itd. molitva. konvencionalnu. kao: spasewe. o zanemarivawu SAMOG ÆIVOTA HRIÃÑANINA kao glavnom izvoru za bogoslovqe. erosnom. krajwem! Izuzetak. predstavqa laiåko bogoslovska liånost i misao poznatog Hristosa Janarasa. qubavnom. ãta sa sobom danas nose? Da li i daqe imaju svoju samorazumqivu. sve zahvaqujuñi tome ãto ne postoji 23 24 Isto. istinitijeg i veñeg izvora bogoslovstvovawa od samog æivota neke liånosti i same Crkve i problema koje æivot donosi pred æivot svake liånosti posebno. na Svetoj Gori Atonskoj! . qubav. nada. Bog. smisao? Naã odgovor je: ne. askeza. vera. åak i na strani „evharistijsko eshatoloãkih“ bogoslova. vaskrsewe. post. Crkva. veñ su oni postali ispraæweni u sebi samima. ontologija. pak. duhovnost. Da pogledamo malo bliæe ovaj problem. igumana manastira Iviron. svrhu. ikonama. istinsku punoñu. pravoslavqe. 2008: 511 – 519. Sveta Trojica. smirewe..Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 37 jednu „opasnu“ tezu o ispraæwewu pojmova i sadræaja bogoslovqa. postajuñi glavna „inspiracija“ za susret sa Svetom Trojicom. bogoslova i pesnika æivota i erosa prema Svetoj Trojici i monaãko – asketska figura oca Vasilija Gondikakisa. Veñ smo se pitali ãta danas savremenom åoveku i hriãñaninu znaåe tradicionalni temeqni pojmovi bogoslovqa. liånost. spisima. posebno od evharistije kao „glavnog izvora“23. tekstovima. nemaju! I to ne samo u svojoj recipiranosti od strane onih koji primaju i prihvataju te pojmove. Odvojeno od svojih izvora. sloboda. ãta oni govore. predawima. a o kojoj skoro da nema pomena u savremenoj pravoslavnoj bogoslovskoj misli.

u ovaj naã æivot.38 Teoloãki åasopis. darovi! Odvojeni od Spasiteqa. 1998: 53. Ãta tek reñi za pojmove: spasewe. naãe æivqewe. nije samo „svet“ onaj koji. veñ da su sami hriãñani „ubili“ svoje sopstvene znakove sporazumevawa. naravno. Tako. oni ne samo da postaju neaktuelni. ili u najboqem sluåaju kao joã jedna grupa koja se „bavi duhovnoãñu“. postoji mnoãtvo religija koje se pozivaju na pravoverno tumaåewe istog. . S druge strane... danas reå „Crkva“ veñini zvuåi ili kao druãtveno – humanitarno . odnoãewa ka svetu i ka sebi samima. jer. Nije dovoqno reñi samo: „Bog“ i oåekivati saglasnost svih oko ovog „termina“. naã dvig ka Wemu. Ali. veñ postaju mrtvi! Dolazimo do uvida da. N° 9 neka zasebna „ontologija pojmova“25 nezavisno od liånosti i zajednice koje ih razumeju i daju im smisao i semantiåko znaåewe. oni se pretvaraju u znakove – tragove iza kojih zjapi praznina od ispraæwenosti smisla i naznaåewa. Tako. takav kakav je i nijedan drugi. ili kao nacional – institucija – åuvar.biznis institucija. u ovom sluåaju savremenih qudi i hriãñana. duhovnost. dakle. razumevawa. åak i oni „van Crkve“ mogu nas mnogo nauåiti tome. priznajemo sa æaqewem. stvari su joã teæe sa klasiåno hriãñanskim pojmovima. jedino isti ti hriãñani mogu ponovo oæiveti svoje pojmove i uåiniti ih razumqivim i spasavajuñim. veñ uvek otvoreni za „dogaœaj dolaska Drugog“ u naãu aktuelnost i savremenost. od Duha i od Darodavca istih. 26 Kao oni koji iako jednom definisani nikada nisu zacementirani. Neshvatawem i neæivqewem istinskog smisla koju pojmovi imaju u sebi26. Mada. usled svoje „greãnosti i sekularizovanosti“ neñe da åuje za hriãñanstvo. oni su danas postali autonomni i samodovoqni pamfleti kojima hriãñani neuspeãno pokuãavaju da predstave svoj identitet i 25 Papadopulos. nerecipirani i nerazumqivi. ali Koji potrebuje naã priziv.

od – muåewa – u – paklu“ konotaciju. Problem jezika bogosluæewa nemamo hrabrosti ni da zapoåenemo. Problema koji se javqaju u obzorju smrti åoveåije i wegove prolaznosti. Naravno. Mi upuñujemo na joã ãire posmatrawe problema. poboænosti. teatralnost. to sve dotiåe i crkvenu poboænost kao izraz bogoslovqa i bogosluæewa. Ipak. kakvu stvarnost. Imajuñi pred sobom „krizirajuñe“ bogoslovqe. kakvu autentiånost. liturgije. bogosluæewa uopãte kao „dela naroda“. „askezama“. ili bivajuñi izvor istog. Kakvu reå. . posledica su ove razdvojenosti.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 39 svoju posebnost u odnosu na druge27. bogosluæewe se pretvara u pojavu koju ovako definiãemo: sentimentalno señawe na davne dogaœaje iz æivota Hristovog. imitacija æivog æivota Crkve. Ali o tome je joã davno mnogo reåeno. hiperrealno posto27 Za ovu tvrdwu namerno ne navodimo nikakvu referencu. bogosluæewe i poboænost su odvojeni od bogoslovqa i obrnuto. Problemi koji se javqaju u „naåinima“ sluæewa. U suãtini. S tim povezan i uslovqen jeste problem liturgije. „obiåajima“. Kao i mrtvom bogoslovqu. tj. kakav æivot svetu i åoveku moæe ponuditi jedno razcrkvqeno bogoslovqe. a svi zajedno odvojeni od æivota. maske. ili neãto tako sliåno. „spasiti se“ najåeãñe sa sobom ima druãtveno – ekonomsku ili „spasiti – se . Neaktuelnost. ne moæemo prenebregnuti problem svojevrsne „poboænosti“ koja se raœa u trenucima kada neevharistijsko bogoslovqe preokupira naãu paæwu i naãe poboæne postupke. gluma. naivnost. „praksama“. pokuãavajuñi s tim da poveæemo problem bogoslovqa. bezidentitetnost. tj. tako i mrtvoj poboænosti prete iste nepogode. mrtvu stvarnost. jer nam je ona najoåiglednija u aktuelnom æivotu naãe pomesne Crkve i wenih parohija. jedna bezbogoslovska liturgija i jedna neevharistijska poboænost (s tim da su meœusobne varijante istih bezbrojne)? Laænu reå. marame i ãamije. „starinama“. uzdasi. Za proseånog hriãñanina.

sam obiåan æivot svakodnevnice Crkve. jeziåkih oblikovawa. uãivawem u mrtve kalupe æivota. liturgija i poboænost umiru i postaju samo jedni od fosila u muzejskoj zbirci interesantnih. æivi. kao Mesta na kome Jedan postaje mnogi i mnogi postaju Jedan28 i Crkve kao zajednice „dolazeñeg . Æivota koji je odvojen od „dogaœaja dolaska Drugog i Drugaåijeg“. moæe biti govora o govoru dolazeñeg. zakona. ostvaruje sebe i svoj æivot kao æivot Crkve za dogaœaj neoåekivanog – smisla – i . Hrista i zajednice „prizivajuñih – Drugog“ tj. mræwa. iskustveni. Samo Tu. umirawa. za dogaœaj veånog æivota. itd. pored reåenog. samo Tu moæe biti jezika o jeziku aktuelnosti. saborni. Evharistije. Izvor takvog æivog bogoslovqa. obiåaja. hriãñana. samo Tu moæe biti pojmova o pojmovima istinskog. 2004: 34. To su plodovi ove krize savremenog crkvenog æivota. preævakavawa starih floskula. iskuãewa. evharistijska liturgija. neshvatawa blage vesti Jevanœeqa. 28 Zizjulas. liturgije i poboænosti jeste sam æivot Crkve.40 Teoloãki åasopis. ali mrtvih eksponata. znawa. koje ñe imati stvarnu vezu sa naãim æivotima. Æivota koji je smrt od poåetka do kraja. pravila. mogli bismo se dotañi joã mnoãtva velikih i malih problema koji uznemiravaju savremeni crkveni æivot.æivota – Donositeqa. . sa svim svojim sivilom svakodnevnice tragedija. mrtvilo mrtvosti. tj. b) Osvrt na ostale probleme Naravno. „pravoslavnih etika“. za dogaœaj qubavi izmeœu Hrista i Wegove Crkve. bogoslovqe. na tom Mestu. onih qudi i hriãñana koji odriåuñi se svakog olakog definisawa. tj. Odvojeno od svog prirodnog Mesta. evharistijska poboænost. Ko ñe nas izbaviti od smrti ove? Daqe neñemo iñi. tj. trvewa. evharistijsko bogoslovqe. ali to i nije tema ovog rada.Drugog“tj. samim tim i zatvoren. Tako i samo tako. N° 9 jawe. oni postaju iznova aktuelni.

mnogo je nejasno. postaje danas ne mali problem. bolesti u kojoj virus „neåeæwe za Drugim Dolazeñim“ uniãtava sve. ãta je to? Ali. Kako prosuditi sva izvitoperewa koja se javqaju u onome ãto mi zovemo „pravoslavqe“? Pravoslavqe. pak. monaha i wihove svojevrsne teoretske i stvarne razdvojenosti. Nacionalizam. da li je to pravoslavqe? A ekspanzionistiåki ãovinizam? Homofobija. pred nama stoje problemi klira. krstonosnim i muånim izazovom problema koji se nalaze unutar Crkve. Takoœe. „eshatologije“. jeste. antagonisti s druge strane. naroåito kod epigona jednog takvog utopizma. tj. U stvari. moæda? Mræwa? A ostalo? Jel’ to pravoslavqe? Za mnoge. Puteva kojima se oni kreñu. „buduñnosti“. Ipak. Mnoge se pojave proglaãavaju pravoslavnim. a pritom nemaju nikakvih suãtinskih veza sa pravoslavqem kao „iskustvom susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka“. izraza i izvoœewa bogosluæewa. Brinuñi se samo za „ontologije“. Problemi identiteta istih. na æalost.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 41 Spomenimo samo to da crkveno i hriãñansko bogoslovqe stoji pred teãkim. Wihovi. zanemarivawem onoga ãto Crkva „kao zajednica buduñnosti“ jeste. Zanemarivawe Svetog Pisma Crkve. Relevantnosti. posebno Novog Zaveta. laika. koji je najåeãñe daleko od takvih „izmiãqenih problema“ koje utopijski bogoslovi hoñe da nametnu. kao jednog od temeqa bogoslovqa i iskustva Crkve. ovi epigoni zanemaruju probleme Crkve koji su problemi ovog – ovde svakodnevnog æivota. Nama nije jasno. to je samo joã jedan posledica one bolesti napred formulisane. Osmiãqavaju æivot svoj. ali i unutar sveta. a takoœe i za liturgijske sitnice oko pitawa pokreta. insistirawe na krajwostima ãto mogu da nastanu iz neadekvatnog shvatawa ãta znaåe reåi „evharistijski“ i „eshatoloãki“. koji je jedan te isti æivot Crkve. . ko to sme danas da pita? Danas kada se åini da niãta nije jasnije od toga. Poseban problem predstavqa pojava onog ãto smo napred nazvali „evharistijsko – eshatoloãki utopizam“. bolesti odvajawa i razdvajawa bogoslovqa – liturgije – poboænosti.

tj.42 Teoloãki åasopis. uvek zajedniåka. Problem katiheze. Strepi. itd. tj. problemi. kao „znaka Carstva Boæijeg“. to je prevelika tema za ovaj premali prostor. Ali. borbe za mesto u druãtvu. iãåekivawe. Åeka. ali opet promaãujuñi istinski smisao Crkve. neiskustvenog). otvarawe. Svetlo „personalistiåke ontologije“ mitropolita Zizjulasa moæe zasvetliti. . koja je uvek saborna. sa trezvenoãñu. veronauke u ãkolama29. Problem ekumenizma. Vapi za Onim koji jedini moæe „doneti“ problemima otvarawe. Oåekuje. tj. evharistijska i na-zajednicu-dolazeñegCarstva-upuñujuña. Ostaje joã gomila problema pred kojim Crkva stoji. Problemi. uvek liturgijska. 29 Potrebno je iznova. osmiãqavawe. makar malo. o opasnosti wene otrgnutosti od smisla prave crkvene katiheze. i to ñe. Nada se. problemi. dok Dolazeñi ne doœe.. promisliti mesto veronauke kao joã jednog od „predmeta“ u sistemu dræavnog obrazovawa (deduktivno – racionalistiåkog. Problemi dehumanizacije. Ali samo ako bude daqi podstrek za joã jaåe traæewe. razmekãavawe. Bioetiåki problemi i iskuãewa tehnologije i kibernetike. osoqavawe. N° 9 istiåu nedostatak aktivizma. Traæi. Problem Crkve i politike. tj. biti dovoqno. do iznemoglosti. za poåetak.

Novi Sad: Beseda. Sremski Karlovci: Kwiæarnica Zorana Stojanoviña. Ãmeman. Uvod u krãñanstvo. Jurgen 2008. Moltmann. Raspeti Bog. Caputo. Chicago: Indiana University Press. Teologija i jezik. Naã æivot u Hristu. Izazovi post – metafizike. Ratzinger. Derrida. Lestviånik.The Theology of Event. Hristov æivot u nama. John 2008. Aleksandar 2008. . Beograd: Obraz svetaåki. Evharistija i Carstvo Boæije. Joseph 1984. Rijeka: Ex Libris. Jovan 2004. Zagreb: Krãñanska misao. Jaques 2004. Mario 2008. Papadopulos. Sveta Gora Atonska: Hilandar. The Weakness of God . Pisanje i razlika. Kopiñ. Jovan 1998. Sarajevo: Ãahin – Paãiñ. Beograd: Hriãñanska misao. Stilijan 1998.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 43 BIBLIOGRAFIJA Zizjulas.

rs Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: pisani i slikani izvori Rezime U ovom radu ñe se govoriti o simbolici hriãñanskog praznika Pedesetnica.36 Fakultet za kulturu i medije. ponaosob. Primljeno: 21. Naroåito je vaæan dogaœaj u kome apostoli govore razliåitim jezicima i razumeju se meœusobno.02. i svakome daje posebne darove. ovaj praznik je posebno vaæan jer Sveti Duh silazi na svakog ålana Crkve. . kolebqivu ali veoma vaænu ulogu u prenoãewu Predawa. Taj naroåiti dar. Sveti Duh. 11 070 Novi Beograd Originalni nauåni rad vcvetkovska-ocokoljic@megatrend.edu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 45 dr Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoqiñ UDK 291.2010 Goce Delåeva 8. Takoœe. opisan je na ikonama praznika Pedesetnica. perspektive). Na dan Pedesetnice.2010 Megatrend univerzitet Prihvañeno: 18. S obzirom na to da je kroz istoriju hriãñanstva slika imala. geometrije. u ovom radu je naglasak na istraæivawu simbolizma pojedinaånih likovnih elemenata (boje. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole i obnavqa jedinstvo Boga i qudi kroz duhovnu izgradwu Crkve. Kquåne reåi: Pedesetnica. kroz pisane i slikane izvore.01. ikona. wihovom poreklu i wihovoj ulozi u prenoãewu nevidqivog sveta materijalnim sredstvima izraæavawa na ikoni Pedesetnica. simbolizam. koji se javqa kroz delovawe Svetog Duha.

N° 9 Uvod Savremeno druãtvo ispuweno je brojnim slikama. Ikona Pedesetnice stoga ima podjednaku vaænost ali i dodatnu vrednost jer se na dan Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispunilo obeñawe Hrista. Sveti Duh je izlio svoje brojne darove na prisutne i omoguñio poåetak stvarawa zemaqske Crkve po uzoru na nebesku. åovek moæe sozercati nevidqivog Boga i ugledati se na svetiteqe i muåenike. Trojice i Trojiåin dan. Åovekova potreba da nevidqivo predstavi materijalnim. Uloga ikone – kao religijske slike bila je kolebqiva u hriãñanskoj istoriji. ove dve ikone.46 Teoloãki åasopis. Ovim praznikom proslavqa se „zavrãni åin osnivawa Hristove Crkve na zemqi. propovedaju i åine åuda“1. a dvanaestorica apostola udostojeni da svedoåe o Hristu. opipqivim sredstvima izraæavawa vekovima je bila u sluæbi religije. koje izraæavaju razliåita znaåewa 1 Jovanoviñ. meœutim wen opstanak govori o tome da posredstvom we. Prema reåima Uspenskog s obzirom na to da se u pravoslavnoj Crkvi praznik Svete Trojice slavi na prvi dan Pedesetnice (u nedequ) i da se na taj dan kroz bogosluæewe izraæava dogmatsko uåewe o Svetoj Trojici. Æeqa åoveka da dosegne duhovne visine i danas je podjednako aktuelna a civilizacijski razvoj nije uspeo da zadovoqi wegov unutraãwi svet. a sledeñi dan (Duhovski ponedeqak) je posveñen Svetom Duhu. 2005: 387. kada su stvoreni uslovi za wen pun æivot. Poreklo praznika pedesetnica Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole spada u Velike praznike a poznat je pod imenima: Duhovi. . oboæewe apostola i poåetak duhovnog puta. te je stoga odreœeno kao civilizacija slike.

11). i praznik berbe na svrãetku svake godine. u trostrukom obliåju: „u Tvorcu i Gospodu istorije spasewa. kao señawe na unutraãwe jedinstvo. odgovaraju prazniku Pedesetnica2. 2006: 520. Sin se vratio Ocu. u krãtewu Crkve ogwem i Svetim Duhom. kad sabereã trud svoj sa wive“ (2 Moj. Poreklo praznika Pedesetnica potiåe iz Starog Zaveta. kada je Mojsije primio Zakon na Sinaju. u znak zahvalnosti prema Bogu. On je proslavqan i kao zahvalnost za prve plodove na zemqi. stvarawe saveza izmeœu Boga i izabranog naroda. . u skladu sa reåima svetog Jovana Preteåe (Mat. Poseban znaåaj ova dva praznika objediwuje se u vidqivom silasku Svetog Duha na apostole.16). Tako Sveti Duh ispuwava opãtu voqu tri Lica. pedeset dana nakon Hristovog vaskrsewa i deset dana nakon wegovog vaznesewa. Isto. 2003: 120. Tako se kroz ikonu Svete Trojice daje nagoveãtaj tajnovitosti Boæanskog postojawa. 3. u vaskrslom Gospodu Isusu Hristu. Evdokimov: 2009: 230. Silazak Svetog Duha predstavqa drugo delovawe Oca jer Otac najpre ãaqe Sina a zatim i Svetog Duha. Benc. Slavqen po isteku sedam nedeqa. uzviãenom u Boga i u Svetom Duhu koji se razliåitim darovima Duha moñno pojavqivao meœu wima“4. ovaj praznik je imao i drugo znaåewe. buduñu æetvu i kao dan (dar) Gospoda: „I praznik æetve prvina od truda tvojega ãto posijeã u poqu svojem. dok Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole otkriva promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta3. na pedeseti dan posle Pashe. 2008: 208. Loski. a Sveti Duh je siãao kao Liånost“6. Loski 2008: 202.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 47 i smisao. O danu odmora. buduñi da ga ãaqe Otac i da ga predaje Sin5. 23. Vernici doæivqavaju Boæiju stvarnost kao i prvi hriãñani. Praznik 2 3 4 5 6 Uspenski. „Kada je wegovo poslawe okonåano.

2008: 209. 2. ili u æivom meœusobnom zajedniåarewu. Loski 2008: 202. da imate sabor sveti. sledi Liturgiju i stvara jednu ogromnu perspektivu koja prevazilazi okvire istorijskog fragmenta da bi izrazila ‘unutraãwu reå’ dogaœaja“ 10. 2003: 122. na wihovo propo7 8 9 10 Uspenski. Osnovne kompozicione elemente ikone Pedesetnica. dræeñi svitke ili kwige u rukama.26). Tako je Pedesetnica. N° 9 Nedeqa se kao señawe na dan otkrivewa zakona uobliåio kao duhovni i materijalni dar od Boga: „I na dan prvina kad prinosite nov dar Gospodu poslije svojih nedeqa. Apostoli su predstavqeni potpuno smireno. koja je izdvojena prirodom i mnoãtvom liånosti. javqa se novozavetni Savez. „Tako blagodat zakona data Svetim Duhom preuzima mesto zakona sa Sinaja“7.48 Teoloãki åasopis.3). åine apostoli koji sede polukruæno postavqeni i plameni jezici koji sa neba silaze na wihove glave: „I pokazaãe im se razdijeqeni jezici kao ogweni. Ikona Pedesetnice „objediwuje sve tekstove Svetog Pisma. naåelo u skladu sa kojim Crkva æivi i gradi Boæije kraqevstvo na zemqi“8. Isto. kroz silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. nijednoga posla ropskoga ne radite“ (4 Moj. jer je Trojiånost. Æivot Crkve. Kwige i svitci ukazuju na buduñu misiju apostola. zapravo posledica Ovaploñewa. . jer je tvorevina postala sposobna da primi Sveti Duh. i time je ostvaren konaåni ciq Boæanstvenog domostroja na zemqi9. Evdokimov: 2009: 232. i siœe po jedan na svakoga od wih“ (Dap. U skladu sa starozavetnim savezom koji je naåinio Bog izmeœu sebe i qudi. kako se uobiåajeno prikazuje. 28. povezan je suãtinski s ovim uåewem. Loski. Posebna vrednost ikone Pedesetnica je u tome ãto „izraæava najpotpuniju dogmu praznika povezanog sa osnovnom dogmom hriãñanstva – Trojedinim Bogom.

Vremenom ñe se ustaliti izobraæavawe najpre praznog. vek. Ova ikona predstavqa jednu od najstarijih grupnih ikona koja pokazuje izdvojene teme. Vajcman ovu ikonu datira u 10. (1976: 73-76). gde jarko crveni zraci koji se spuãtaju na apostole.4). vek. tamnog. Naroåito interesantan je srediãwi deo ikone.59). u istom nivou scena Predstavqawe u hramu. veka (Manafis at al. ikona je datirana u drugu polovinu 9.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 49 vedawe a gestikulacija i razgovor ukazuju na silazak Svetog Duha „i ispuniãe se svi Duha Svetoga i stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima“ (Dap. Princeton University Press. u dve grupe. a potom unutar tog prostora. str. . ?. izviru iz kruæne mandorle (medaqona) u kojoj je Hristos. na Tajnoj veåeri uspostavqena Evharistija – hleb i vino). Weitzmann. ali je najåeãñe prostor ostavqen prazan. prikaz starca-kraqa (kosmos) a povremeno i qudskih figura koje simbolizuju predstavnike razliåitih naroda. 140. Takoœe. koji su bili prisutni u trenutku ovog velikog dogaœaja (Dap 2. veka ili poåetak 10. prikazana je scena Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. koji deli apostole. koji sede u gornici (koja simvolizuje nastavak propovedi jer je u gornici. kao nevidqivo prisustvo Hrista – Glave Crkve. u monografiji Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. U tom srediãwem delu je ponekad prikazana Bogorodica (kao simvol Crkve). u sredini je scena Vaznesewa a u dowem delu. Vidi u Weitzmann. Rani prikazi praznika pedesetnica Najstarija poznata ikona na kojoj se pojavquje silazak Svetog Duha na apostole – Pedesetnica (Penthkosth) potiåe iz 7. slika 7. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. K. polukruænog prostora ispod apostola. izbor najvaænijih 11 Ozoqin ikonu datira u 7. 2. Na woj su prikazane åetiri scene u tri reda: Na vrhu ikone prikazana je scena Roœewe Isusa Hrista a odmah pored we. na Sinaju. veka11 i nalazi se u manastiru Sveta Katarina. 1990: 98).

a wena ikonografija se mewa „odvajawem praznika Vaznesewa. kao ãto ste beskvasni. dakle. Ipak. N° 9 kompozicionih elemenata. potiåu iz perioda nakon ikonoborstva. u pedeseti dan – znaåi veñ krajem 4. tako se i na dan Pedesetnice. Ozoqin celokupnu ikonografiju naziva starohriãñanskom. Sveti Duh u obliku goluba se pojavquje prethodno na krãtewu Isusa Hrista. veka“14.7). da bude novo tijesto. 1990. simetriju i druge uobiåajene elemente putem kojih opisani dogaœaj otkriva sveto projavqivawe i slavu12. wegov istraæivaåki rad ukazuje na to da je prvobitna ikonografija praznika Pedesetnica bila povezana sa praznikom Vaznesewe i da su pre wegovog „osamostaqewa“ rani hriãñani praznovali „osmi dan“ (Gospodwi dan) a „Dan pashe“ je slavqen kao tajna ærtve. . Meœutim. koji su predstavqeni u sedeñem poloæaju. u åetrdeseti dan posle Vaskrsa i Silaska Svetog Duha. a opravdawe na sceni Pedesetnica (gde ñe se i kasnije pojavqivati povremeno) moæe se pronañi u reåima Evdokimova13 da kao ãto se Sveti Duh na dan krãtewa Gospodweg nadnosi nad qudsku prirodu Hristovu i usinovquje je. u skladu sa Prvom poslanicom Korinñanima „Odbacite. jer sva kasnija izobraæewa. 2007: 28.50 Teoloãki åasopis. Ozoqin. Tako se ona ne smatra samo kao posledwi dan pashalnog perioda. 98-99. koga ñe otac poslati u ime 12 13 14 Manafis. koja ñe se ubrzo uobliåiti u prikaz Pedesetnice. Jer i Pasha naãa Hristos. izmeœu apostola. prinoseñi åoveka kao dar Bogu. 2009: 230. u pokretu ogwenih jezika Otac. Interesantno je primetiti da se u sredini. nadnosi nad qude i usinovquje ih. posredstvom Svetog Duha. veñ kao tajna izbavqewa jer u pedeseti dan posle vaskrsewa Hrista. Evdokimov. nalazi jedva primetan golub naslikan s lica (iscrtan na zlatnoj pozadini). ærtvova se za nas“ (1 Kor. stari kvasac. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole u skladu sa obeñawem Spasiteqa: „A Utjeãiteq Duh Sveti. 5. a ispod Hrista u mandorli.

sa æenama i sa Marijom materom Isusovom i sa brañom wegovom“ (Dap. a sa leve strane je starozavetni sveãtenik sa kadionicom u ruci17. 18 19 Vidi: Ozoqin. br. 2007: 32-36. 1. gle. noãen. dva åovjeka u haqinama bijelim stadoãe pored wih“ (Dap. veka (Bobbio. 17 S obzirom na to da na ikoni ne postoji hronoloãko vreme. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. koji blagosiqa. Na woj pronalazimo. Sliåna predstava Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje se i na ampuli iz 10. 2016) u sceni Vaznesewe. Hrista na prestolu sa kwigom u ruci. br. 16 Vidi: Slika 3 (Ozoqin. „Posledwi dan pedesetnice. 10). Ovu scenu Ozoqin naziva Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica (2007: 40). u gorwem delu. Meœutim.26). 2007: 46). Sa desne strane Bogorodice nalazi se sveti Jovan Krstiteq u stavu propovedawa. 2007: 33). On ñe vas nauåiti svemu i podsjetiñe vas na sve ãto vam rekoh“ (Jovan 14. 2007: 39. likovi imaju dubqe. anœelima. 1. moguñe predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha u obliku plamenih zraka.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 51 moje. prañen anœelom. Iznad wene glave. 1019). simboliåko znaåewe u odnosu na realno prisustvo u trenutku nekog dogaœaja. takoœe prañen anœelom: „I dok netremice gledahu za wim kako ide na nebo. u mandorli. postavqena je „zvezda prañena personifikacijama sunca i meseca.14). veka (Monza. spuãta se po pet zraka iz Hristove mandorle. . sa pretpostavkom da se odnose na ogwene jezike silaska Svetog Duha18. Jedno od utemeqewa wenog prisustva na ovoj sceni pronalazimo u pomenu zajedniåke molitve: „Ovi svi bijahu istrajno i jednoduãno na molitvi i moqewu. nedeqa saæima unutar sebe u jedan dan „tajinsko znaåewe pedeset dana“15. Gorwi deo scene prati iste elemente 15 Isto. Vidi: Slika 8 (Ozoqin. Na levu i desnu grupu od Bogorodice. pronalazi se joã na ampuli iz 6. U dowem delu nalazi se Bogorodica Oranta. koji nose upaqene bakqe“.

U jednom egipatskom papirusu iz 3. namewenog za prodaju hodoåasnicima. Ozoqin21 smatra da je ovo prvo (poznato) predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole i da je usled nepostojawa posebne ikonografije vezane za ovaj dogaœaj.8) neposredno pre Vaznesewa („I ovo rekavãi dok oni netremice gledahu. dubqa simbolika pronalazi se u bliskoj vezi izmeœu ova dva dogaœaja jer Hristos obeñava Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole („nego ñete primiti silu kada siœe Sveti Duh“ Dap. godiãwe. Gabra (2001. Takoœe se smatra da ampule22 nisu bile unikatan proizvod. Boæijom vaznese se“ (Dap. veka pomiwe se da je postojala grnåarska radionica koja je proizvodila 15 000 kråaga za vino. dræaå za lampu od terakote (3.2). veli Gospod“ (Is. 21 22 Vidi: Ozoqin. vek) na kome je prikazan Danilo sa lavovima. okruæena apostolima. 2. Brojne ampule (ili åuturice) bile su åesto ukraãavane scenom svetog Mine u molitvi. Dap. po tipskom obrascu srebrnih ploåica. usmereni ka apostolima. sa dve kamile koje kleåe.9). dakle. „jer je sve to ruka moja stvorila. 66. 2005: 374). to je postalo sve. prati isti kompozicioni obrazac kao ampula sa svetim Minom (Templ. Tako one nisu bile usamqeni proizvodi ranih hriãñanskih umetnika veñ tipski. Grnåarija je bila jeftina i masovno se proizvodila.33). 1. nalazi se otvorena (desnica20) ruka Gospodwa jer „Desnicom. poznat u antici i judaistiåkom slikarstvu. 20 Likovni simvol boæanskog delovawa i spasewa. Takoœe. i da su predstavqale neãto nalik danaãwem industrijskom. Meœutim. Vidi: Skalova. veka (Jovanoviñ. 2007: 45-47. 23). podiæe se i uze ga oblak ispred oåiju wihovih“. slika 20. .52 Teoloãki åasopis. serijskom proizvodu. scena prikquåena Vaznesewu. a u hriãñanskom slikarstvu se javqa od 4. veñ da su se proizvodile u velikoj koliåini. 2009: 126). Ispod mandorle sa Hristom. 1. N° 9 predstavqawa dok je na dowem delu prikazana Bogorodica Oranta. koja je ispustila goluba – Svetog Duha a sa obe wene strane izviru kratki svetlosni zraci iz mandorle.

25 26 Uspenski. ikona ili fresaka. kao znak prosvetqewa osnovnog åelovoœe tela i sadræanih misli (.47). moæe svedoåiti sledeña opisana iluminacija. Vidi: Slika 12 (Ozoqin. 2007: 60-65). u kojoj su apostoli bili okupqeni u trenutku silaska Svetog Duha26. zadræava srediãwe mesto u predstavi „a Gospod svaki dan dodavaãe Crkvi one koji se spasavahu“ (Dap. Bogorodica kao majka Crkve. okruæena apostolima na åijim oreolima se nalaze plameni jeziåci a iznad wih je tamni svod koji se nalazi iznad celokupne grupe. U prilog tome da su one najverovatnije bile replike scena sa iluminiranih rukopisa. veka24. Bogorodica je prikazana u sredini. 2. Jovanoviñ. Postavqawe plamenih jezika na oreole. prema reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova ukazuje na to da je Sveti Duh siãao u obliku jezika „koji su spuãteni na glave apostola. .) pokazujuñi da Sveti Duh prebiva u svetima“25.. Loski 2008: 209. Moæe se 23 Pojedinaåni sluåajevi ovakvih scena javqañe se povremeno i kasnije. 2005: 388. 24 Rukopis se nalazi u Lavrentinskoj biblioteci u Firenci. Vremenom ñe se luåni (arhitektonski) svod izobraæavati kao aluzija na mesto dogaœaja. Tako se ona pojavquje u saåuvanom rukopisu (Jevanœeqe iz Ravule) krajem 6. vek) sa novinom uvoœewa elementa enterijera koji ukazuje na odvijawe dogaœaja u zatvorenom prostoru. Vremenom ñe se scene Vaznesewe i Pedesetnica razdvojiti23 ali ñe Bogorodica joã dugo åiniti sastavni deo brojnih ikona Pedesetnice. i iz åijeg kquna izlazi pomenuti plamen. Tako se scena Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje u dva sirijska rukopisa (14-16. to jest gornicu. to jest u gornici. 2007: 53).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 53 utvrœeni obrasci izobraæavawa scena i svetiteqa. Na oreolu Bogorodice (koji je jedini pozlañen) je takoœe plameni jezik ali je on povezan sa golubom koji se nalazi iznad we i spuãta se iz nebeskog svoda. odmah iznad glava apostola.. Detaqnije (Ozoqin.

simvolizujuñi prikaz uzlaznog puta na ikoni. unutar trodelne kompozicije. Tako dolazi do ispuwewa otkrivewa jednog Boga u tri Ipostasi. veka. Obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (bez prisustva Bogorodice ali sa prikazom zlatnog goluba) koji primaju Sveti Duh. 2008: 202. Meœutim. pojava praznog prostora moæe se pratiti joã od burnog ikonoboraåkog perioda 9. ni ugotovqeni presto. otvorena kwiga Jevanœeqa. iz 7. a koji se prvi put pojavquje joã na pomenutoj ikoni. simvol Sina. koji ostaje iza wih. veka. i jedan golub na Kwizi. Ova scena u skladu je sa reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova da je na dan silaska Svetog Duha na apostole projavqeno konaåno delovawe Treñe liånosti Svete Trojice kao sile osveñewa. Tako je opisana simboliåka predstava neopisive Svete Trojice. simvol Svetog Duha“27.54 Teoloãki åasopis. Uspenski. Ovaj prikaz prisutan je u antici a joã ranije u scenama drevnog Egipta kao simbol prisustva nevidqivog Boga. Takoœe. izmeœu apostola. kao i brojni drugi kompozicijski elementi i simvoli. ñe se vremenom ustaliti. na iluminacijama iz Hludovskog Psaltira. dok ñe se uporedo sa wim razviti polukruæni prostor ispod apostola sa simvolizacijom mraka . . odreœen praznim tronom (ugotovqenim prestolom). prazna stolica nije izvorno hriãñanskog porekla. u manastiru Sveta Katarina. tron. simvol Oca. a ipak razliåite“28. U sredini. Loski. iznad apostola. jednosuãtne i nerazdeqive. odnosno konaåno ispuwewe obeñawa.neznaboæaåkog sveta. Prema reåima Uspenskog 27 28 Ozoqin.33) otkriva svetu blagodarnost bogopoznawa tajanstva Svete Trojice. Silazak Svetog Duha koji proishodi iz Oca i izliva se kroz Boga Sina (Dap. 2. N° 9 pretpostaviti da je nebeski svod predstavqen iseåkom iznad Bogorodice i apostola preteåa uspostavqawa polukruænog prostora koji ñe se kasnije javiti. „Svi apostoli gledaju ka sredini gde se nalazi simboliåka predstava Svete Trojice. nalazi se prazan prostor. 2007: 74.

Otkr. Uporedo sa izvijawem polukruæne klupe na kojoj sede apostoli. 2008: 208. Na wenom mestu postavqen je prazan prostor koji odvaja dve grupe apostola. Oni se nalaze unutar enterijera. 6. Apostoli su prikazani. Tako i uputstvo za izobraæavawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole (poznatom i kao Duhovi) u Kwizi popa 29 30 31 Uspenski. Hristos nije vidqivo prisutan ali je On „Glava koja je uvek prisutna“31. stihira glasa 2) obrañajuñi se stareãinama naroda tako su se i apostoli okupili u nedoumici oko naåina propovedawa i iãåekivawu da postanu dostojni da ãire Hristovu nauku. 3. Kao ãto „iziœe Isus i uåaãe“ (veliko veåerwe. Uspenski. i primaju Sveti Duh. åija tela åine Crkvu. U wemu se javqaju dva prikaza: qudi i/ili kraq. Ova scena kompozicijski veoma podseña na ikonu Poduåavawe u hramu. izvija se i wen dowi deo obrazujuñi polukruæni tamni prostor. postavqenih u polukrugu.13. Moñ propovedawa (kao jedan od darova) se sa Hrista (bogoåoveka). Loski. . Od 12. Tako su „dvanaest apostola koji obrazuju jedan konaåan oblik (polukrug) predivan izraz jedinstva tela Crkve sa raznovrsnoãñu wenih ålanova“ a wihovo grupisawe je dovrãeno prazninom – nepopuwenim mestom – mestom nevidqive glave Crkve. Tako se uspostavqa obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (Lk. najåeãñe u æivoj gestikulaciji dok se na wihove oreole iz nebeskog svoda spuãtaju zraci Duha Svetog.2). veka sve åeãñe se javqaju ikone Pedesetnice bez prisustva Bogorodice. Evdokimov. 2. odnosno Hristom“30. 20. dakle u gornici. prenosi na åoveka (apostole).14) kao dvanaest plemena Izraiqa.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 55 hriãñanstvo je u mnogoboæaåkom svetu izabralo sve ono ãto je wegovo i nazvalo ga „hriãñanstvom pre Hrista“ 29. kroz silazak Svetog Duha. 2009: 232. 2000: 50. Qudi na sceni simvolizuju „qude poboæne iz svakog naroda koji je pod nebom“ (Dap. 5) jer Gospod kaæe: „Sabrañu sve narode“ (Joil.

gore. Jovanoviñ. 2002: 319. Kada prostreãe i proåitaãe. Sveti Duh kao golub. Luka se tako nazva prvi zograf na zemqi“36. sluãajuñi glas sa nebesa. Mediñ.. i na ubrusu dvanaest svitaka. I utvrdiãe ga u Veliki Åetvrtak. U priruåniku za ikonopisce pod nazivom Erminija porodice Zografski34 (1728) pronalazimo sledeñe uputstvo za slikawe scene Silazak Svetog Duha: „Dom i dvanaestorica apostola sede u polukrugu. i oko wega jako svetlo a dvanaest ogwenih jezika izlazi od wega i spuãta se na svakog pojedinog od tih apostola“35. Novogradska ikona pedesetnice – silazak svetog duha na apostole Uloga ikone je da propoveda podjednako kao i reå. Prema apokifnom jevanœequ ikona (slikana rukom åoveka) je nastala neposredno posle Jevanœeqa: „ (. Najraniji poznati prevod Erminije Dionisija iz Furne na slovenski jezik. Tu uze sveti Luka i naslika åetiri ikone gledajuñi na lice Bogorodice.) I tu uzeãe hartiju i pisahu. I sastaviãe sveto Jevanœeqe. Sveti 32 33 34 35 36 Poznatoj i pod nazivom Drugi jerusalimski rukopis.56 Teoloãki åasopis. . Mediñ. 2002: 615-616. na glavi ima krunu i nad wim ova slova (KOZMOS?) a slavenski (M?R?). i nad domom. tada prinese svako svoje napisano. N° 9 Danila32 (1674) sadræi tekst prema Isaiji: „Gospod ovo kaæe: Uzeñu vas iz svih naroda i okupiti vas iz svih plemena“33. Glas sa nebesa prestade. i ispod wih mala prostorija. i u woj star åovek dræi pred sobom ubrus obema rukama.. 2005: 367.

Ikona Pedesetnica – Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole pripada Novgorodskoj ãkoli iz 15. Tako se Sveti Duh izliva na apostole ali i na sve prisutne „jednoduãno“ (Dap. 28-29). U povijenom luku ispod wih. Telo Crkve i sklad sabornosti prikazan na ovoj ikoni izobraæavañe se vremenom na svim prikazima vaseqenskih sabora. Na ikoni kao i na fresci. ka sopstvenom svetu. kao znak krãtewa Duhom i vatrom jer po reåima Joila Gospod kaæe: „Izliñu od Duha mojega na svako tijelo“ (Dap. iz kojeg se spuãta dvanaest ogwenih zraka ili vatrenih jezika (ovde prikazanih u tamno plavoj boji) na apostole. Joil. Ona simvolizuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu. eshatoloãki smisao. duhovnu 37 Uspenski. i 14. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. postavqen je kraq u crvenoj odeædi i sa belim ubrusom na kome se nalazi dvanaest svitaka. 2. 2000: 161. boja. u mraku. . boæanskog sveta materijalnim. vidqivim i prepoznatqivim sredstvima komunikacije. Stoga su na ikoni prisutni svi apostoli. Kompozicija. iz razliåitih uglova) ikona o kojoj se ovde govori uspela je da saåuva vezu sa predawem u svom najåistijem duhovnom smislu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 57 Grigorije Palama kaæe da „åovek ne moæe videti Boga drugaåije osim posredstvom simvola i telesnih praobraza“37. uvoœewem dimenzije stvarnog prostora i vremena (prikazivawe s leœa. na vrhu scene prikazan je u polukrugu nebeski svod. Na ikoni su prikazani apostoli koji sede na polukruæno postavqenoj klupi (eksedri). iz profila. perspektiva. celina i celokupna scena imaju svoj naroåit. 17. veka (Rusija). 2. uvodeñi posmatraåa u drugu. u zatvorenoj prostoriji (gornici). veka pojavquje manirizam u ikonopisu. svaki detaq. Stav koji je dominirao na ikoni ranijih vekova zamewuje se gestikulacijom. Iznad. Iako se veñ od 13. a wen odnos koji je uvek bio „spoqa“ prema onome koji se moli. 2. postepeno se okreñe ka unutra.1). to jest prikazivawu viãeg. bezvremenu ravan.

10). Meœutim. veka prema Ozoqinu.4). 2007: 6). upravo prema reåima kondaka: „Kada je Gospod siãavãi pomeãao jezike. 2004: 75. ova ikona je dodatno neobiåna jer predstavqa jedinu poznatu ikonu na kojoj nema praznog prostora izmeœu apostola. objavquje wihovo harmoniåno zajedniãtvo. kondak glasa 8). Wihova gestikulacija ispuwena je smirewem i skladnim poretkom. mnogoqudnost40 koja se pomiwe u Delima apostolskim. Tako se potvrœuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu jer „razliåiti su darovi ali je Duh isti“ (1 Kor. 510. jer „stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima. Zajedno. Pariz. koje se na svim ikonama Pedesetnice pojavquje (Ozoqin. kraj 9.58 Teoloãki åasopis. nasuprot pometwi jezika u Vavilonu. sve je pozvao u jedinstvo da sloæno slavimo Najsvetijeg Duha“ (Pedesetnica.4). oni åine celinu sa jedinstvenim skladom i ritmom. 2009: 232. Svaki apostol je u posebnom i drugaåijem stavu i poloæaju od ostalih u skladu sa primawem raznovrsnih darova (1 Kor. Oni sede na sitronu (antiåki obiåaj sedewa na polukruænoj klupi po vaænosti) a prvi meœu jednakima su apostol Petar i Pavle39. Paris Graec. kao ãto im Duh davaãe da kazuju“ (Dap. 8. N° 9 zajednicu u kojoj liånost uzrasta38.13). a kada je delio ogwene jezike. Okrenuti jedni prema drugima oni izgledaju kao da razgovaraju. Vidi: Ocokoqiñ. jer su pojedini qudi koji su ih posmatrali govorili „nakitili su se“ ili „napili su se slatkog vina“ (Dap. Apostoli su izobraæeni u odeñi filosofa – uåiteqa. celina koju obrazuju ukazuje na wihovo meœusobno razumevawe. 2. 12. prikazivana je u dnu ikone (viãe 38 38 Evdokimov. 40 Jedan od upeåatqivih primera prikazivawa mnogoqudnosti je iluminirani prikaz Pedesetnice u Besedama svetog Grigorija Bogoslova (Nacionalna biblioteka. . delio je narode. 2. Na ranijim prikazima. Tako ñe se åudo izlivawa Svetog Duha u vidu dara jezika vremenom u crkvama podraæavati na sluæbi kroz pojavu poznatu kao glasolalija. Bogosluæewe na dan Silaska Svetog Duha. folio 301).

17. Meœutim. svetlost o kojoj se ovde govori nije prirodna veñ Boæanska svetlost pred kojom se svetlost sunca zamraåuje. Evdokimov o ovoj neobiånoj liånosti govori kao o zarobqeniku koji je okruæen sveopãtim paklom u kome se nalazi nekrãteni svet. S obzirom na to da su apostoli u gornici. da svako ko vjeruje u mene ne ostane u tami“ (Jov. primetno je poistoveñivawe zlata i bele boje. uloga zlata je dubqa jer sve boje potpadaju pod zakon prirodne svetlosti a na nebesima je Boæanska svetlost koja sve proæima. on govori o tome kako starac i sam æeli da se prosvetli. 2009: 233. a on sam je Kosmos – „priroda koju je zarobio knez ovoga sveta“.46). i on. Meœutim. Joã od antike prirodna svetlost se istiåe kao uslov vidqive lepote. Meœutim. on „pruæa ruke kako bi primio. 12. kraqevska kruna simvolizuje greh. 2004: 75. Stoga se tama u kojoj æive neverni moæe protumaåiti kroz reåi Gospoda: „Ja u svijet doœoh kao svjetlost. simvolizuje propoved dvanaest apostola. on je pognut godinama. koji su doneli svetlost åitavom svetu svojim pouåavawem“42. Evdokimov. wegova crvena odora simvolizuje ærtvovawe œavolove krvi. . apostolsku misiju Crkve i obeñawe spasewa“ 43. Meœutim. Loski 2008: 209. to jest svetlosti jer „zasja se lice wegovo kao svijetlost“ i haqine wegove „postadoãe bijele kao sneg“ (Mat. blagodat a dvanaest svitaka koje sa poãtovawem dræi na pokrovu. u pisanim izvorima.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 59 qudskih figura) ali ñe vremenom biti zamewena simvoliånim prikazom kraqa kao personifikacije åoveka ili qudi. uopãte. koji vlada u svetu i belo platno u wegovim rukama sa dvanaest svitaka oznaåava dvanaest apostola. jer ga greh Adama åini starcem. Svet ili Knez Mira41. 2-5). dakle u zatvorenoj 41 42 43 Ocokoqiñ. Na ikoni dominiraju zlatne povrãine. jer bi oblici bez svetlosti bili nevidqivi. Uspenski. Iznad wegove glave najåeãñe stoje inskripcije Kosmos. Starac obitava „u tamnom prostoru jer je ceo svet ranije bio bez vere.

Na taj naåin je ikonopisac uspeo da izbegne zamku iluzije prostora i obmane qudskog oka. Graœevina na ikoni predstavqa zatvarawe od spoqaãweg (pojavnog) sveta i otvarawe ka duhovnom svetu unutar åoveka. oni isijavaju svetlost tako da na wima nema senki. „Kontrast izmeœu ova dva sapostojeña sveta veoma je oãtar. Sa druge strane. 44 45 46 Templ. preovladavaju nad ostalim apostolima. dakle prati uzlaznu liniju åoveka u sozercawu „trojiåne energije usredsreœene u Svetom Duhu“45. ka kojoj teæi stari kraq. 2009: 328. tmina na prozorima simvolizuje zamraåenu prirodnu svetlost usled projavqivawa Svetog Duha. Isto. Tako apostoli Petar i Pavle. „Unutraãwi ili duhovni svet je jedino stvarno mesto u nama u kome duhovni dogaœaji ne podleæu zakonima vremena i trodimenzionalnog prostora“44. Energije Svetog Duha dejstvuju u ciqu osloboœewa i preobraæewa zarobqenog kosmosa“46. Na ikoni je arhitektura (koja uvek ima ulogu da prikaæe da se dogaœaj odvija u zasebnom prostoru) osobena i po tome ãto istovremeno vidimo i spoqaãwe i unutraãwe vidove kuñe. kao jedno telo Crkve oni duhovno uzrastaju u Hristu i uspiwu se u sozercawu Boga. Kompozicija ikone graœena je tako da se otvara prema nebu. Evdokimov.60 Teoloãki åasopis. . Neproporcionalnost apostola u odnosu na graœevinu potvrœuje ovo odreœewe. Istovremeno sa uspiwawem deãava se i silazak u tamu. apostoli su izvor svetlosti koja se izlila na wih. 2009: 328. svojom veliåinom. podjednako primajuñi Svetog Duha. gore je veñ „nova zemqa“ vizija idealnog Kosmosa obasjana boæanstvenim ogwem. 2009: 148. Svi zajedno. N° 9 prostoriji. prvi meœu jednakima. Ikona prati naåelo obrnute perspektive u skladu sa postavqawem likova po tematskom znaåaju. Postavqawem dva apostola na vrhu uspostavqena je zakonitost obrnute perspektive i izjednaåena vaænost apostola (prvi meœu jednakima).

Na 47 48 49 50 Ozoqin. vek) åiji dijagram objaãwava naåin na koji se zraci sunca spuãtaju na zemqu. gde su simvolizovali oæivqavajuñu svetlost sunca. 2007: 141. U skladu sa Plotinovim uåewem „celokupna vaseqena moæe biti uspostavqena kao oktava ili osmostepena lestvica do Boga ili Apsolutnog biña sa Vaseqenskom Tamom ili nivoom Apsolutnog Nebiña“50. Meœutim. u odnosu na jaåinu svetlosti (krañi i duæi zraci). Isto. Templ. qude). vode poreklo joã iz drevnog Egipta. Na osnovu ove sheme Templ (2009) je uspostavio pojam „vaseqenske topografije“ koja se javqa na svim ikonama. U hriãñanskom kontekstu sunåevi zraci se pronalaze joã u Hriãñanskoj topografiji Kosme Indikoplesta (6. gde izviru iz kruænog oblika sunca. boga ili cara. 2007: 142. kao medaqon unutar kojeg je poprsje mladiña. Novgorodska ikona Pedesetnice strukturno je organizovana tako da podseña na stenu sa peñinom. „Drevni Istok je kosmos predstavqao u obliku kruga ili klipeusa i stavqao „Kosmokratora“. Prema wegovim reåima „peñina naglaãava najniæe mesto u vaseqeni“ ali i „svetlost i tama ili najviãe i najniæe povezani su sa naåelima Boæanskog zraka (ogwa)“49. 2009: 114. 2009: 140. Isto. Na wegovom dijagramu spuãta se deset sunåevih zraka koji obasjavaju zemqu. Ajnalov (1901) je prvi izneo pretpostavku o sliånosti wegovog izobraæewa sa vizantijskom pedesetnicom48. Sunce je personifikovano na antiåki naåin. . zraci svetlosti se pojavquju i u drugim kulturama. i spuãtaju na zemqu (tj.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 61 Zraci koji se pojavquju. i moæe se tumaåiti i sa tog simboliåkog nivoa. uzdignutog na nivo boæanstva – boga Atona. U skladu sa opisanom simbolikom ona prati obrazac koji je uspostavio Templ (2009). na osnovu Indikoplestusove topografije. u wegovo srediãte“47.

. Na vrhu ikone. Paralela se moæe pronañi i u Templovom polukruænom prikazu nebesa sa polukruænom graœevinom na ikoni.38). Tako apostoli predstavqaju zemqu. vode i „rijeku vode æivota“ (Otkr. 22. 1963: 80. N° 9 nivou Carstva Tame i Zemqe. Geometrijski prikaz podjednako sadræi paralele izmeœu sheme vaseqene i ikone Pedesetnica. pronalazimo desnicu Boga. belog goluba i/ili plamene zrake koji se spuãtaju na apostole i sve prisutne. knez ovoga sveta. Æitije svetog Simeona i Save. Bogdanoviñ. na koje se iz nebesa izliva blagodat Svetog Duha darujuñi im razne darove. 7.62 Teoloãki åasopis. Materije paralela se moæe pronañi sa kraqem koji prebiva u tami. Tako se potvrœuje izlivawe Svetog Duha i uzlazni put na Gospodu. Vrhovi graœevine obrazuju obrnut trougao kao simbol Svetog Duha. zemaqsku Crkvu saåiwenu od qudi. Kada se qudi „obuku u bele haqine“ biñe poput Hrista i æiveñe u sozercawu Wegovog lika „u duãi naslikana“51.1) jer iz utrobe verujuñih „poteñi ñe rijeke vode æive“ (Jn. U tami. 2009: 116. u najviãem i najsvetijem delu. Templ. koja se zavrãava plavim lukom (veñ pomiwanom na iluminaciji u Jevanœequ iz Ravule). bdi starac. na ikoni Pedesetnice. tj. Na ikoni su prema Templovom tumaåewu „liånosti i dogaœaji u potpunosti predstavqeni u vaseqenskom skladu a ne na zemqi“52. 51 52 Vidi: Teodosije Hilandarac.

i po svemu onome sa åime Bog zajedniåari i po blagodati se sjediwuje sa svetim anœelima i qudima. ovo javqawe ne deãava se po suãtini veñ blagodati i sili i energiji koja je zajedniåka Ocu. za nas ovaploñenoga. Sina Boæijeg. . Stoga se „poklawamo ikoni opisanoga. ispuwenu blagodañu Svetog Duha. Dogaœajem silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispuweno je obeñawe Spasiteqa i krãtewe Crkve ogwem jer kada je Hristos proslavqen (Jn. 2008: 208. 2003: 119. Crkva gradi odraz nebeskog carstva na zemqi. Sinu i Duhu. Tako apostoli åine jedno telo. Uspenski. Tako je Crkva „punota buduñi da je Duh Sveti oæivotvorava i ispuwava Boæanstvom.39) delovawe Svetog Duha je dobilo novu dimenziju u odnosu na prethodno delovawe kada je „govorio kroz proroke“. U skladu sa izdvojenom prirodom i liånostima Svete Trojice. 2003: 120-122. Loski. Loski. U woj Boæanstvo obitava telesno kao ãto je obitavalo u oboæenom Hristovom åoveãtvu“53. 7. koje 53 54 55 Loski.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 63 Zakquåak Æivot Crkve je suãtinski povezan sa dogmom Trojedinog Boga. omivena i proåiãñena krvqu Hristovom)“ jer „Hristos uzlazi da bi siãao Duh Sveti“54. jednu Crkvu. manastiri. i tako daqe) zajedno odraz na zemaqskom planu Boæanskog Trojedinog æivota“55. Tako se otkriva i potvrœuje promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta. ponosno prenoseñi poklowewe na prvolik“. „On silazi u svet i Crkvu (koja je iskupqena. Jer kako kaæe sveti Grigorije Palama. verujuñi u Jedno Boæanstvo. Tako su „struktura kanona i naåelo celokupne hriãñanske strukture (crkvene zajednice. Triipostasno i Svemoñno. „primamo sva crkvena predawa pisana i nepisana. i pre svih najtajanstveniju i sveãtenu Sluæbu i Priåeãñe i Sabrawe (litugrijsko)“.

(1978: 473-477). N° 9 nikako ne gubi jedinstvenost i prostotu zbog sila i Ipostasi (svojih)“56. boja. 56 Sveti Grigorije Palama. Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere. . to jest prikazivawu viãeg. Kompozicija.64 Teoloãki åasopis. perspektiva. svaki kompozicijski element ima svoj naroåit. Na ikoni. boæanskog sveta vidqivim sredstvima komunikacije. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. Tako se elementi kompozicije poistoveñuju sa reåima iz svetih spisa a gledawe ikone postaje åitawe koje vodi ka sozercawu Lika Gospodweg. eshatoloãki smisao.

Œuro 1998. Kurt 1976. Beograd. Weitzmann. Biblija ili Sveto Pismo Staroga i Novoga Zavjeta. Jovanoviñ. Beograd: Fakultet za kulturu i medije. Apokrifi novozavetni. Jovanoviñ. Srpska kwiæevna zadruga i Prosveta. Zoran 2005. Pavle 2009. Benc. Tomislav 2005. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Daniåiñ. Umetnost ikone: teologija lepote. Princeton: Princeton University. Vizije u hriãñanstvu. Beograd: Jugoslovensko biblijsko druãtvo. Ernst 2006. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. Azbuånik pravoslavne ikonografije i graditeqstva. . Dimitrije 1963. Stare srpske biografije. Vladimir 2003. Megatrend Univerziteta i Visoka ãkola – Akademija Srpske Pravoslavne Crkve za umetnost i konservaciju. Evdokimov. Ogled o mistiåkom bogoslovqu Istoåne Crkve. Beograd: Åigoja.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 65 Bibliografija Bogdanoviñ. Loski. Beograd: Muzej SPC. Beograd: Prosveta.

66

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Mediñ, Milorad 2002. Stari slikarski priruånici. Beograd: Republiåki zavod za zaãtitu spomenika kulture i Druãtvo prijateqa Svete Gore Atonske. Naniñ, Mirko 2005. Tropari i kondaci za sve dane u godini. Ãid: Srpska pravoslavna zajednica Ãid. Ozoqin, Nikolaj 2007. Pravoslavna ikona Pedesetnice: poreklo i razvoj wenih konstitutivnih tema u Bizantijskoj epohi. Begrad-Ãibenik: Istina, izdavaåka ustanova Eparhije dalmatinske. Ocokoqiñ, Jugoslav 2004. Ikona: åitawe, pisawe i sozercawe sa teologijom ikone. Beograd: Jugoslav Ocokoqiñ. Palama, Grigorije 1978. „Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere“. prev. Atanasije Jevtiñ. Beograd: Teoloãki pogledi 4. Skalova, Zuzana, Gawdat Gabra 2006. Icons of the Nile Waley. Egypt: Egyptian International Pub lishing Company – Longman. Templ, Riåard 2009. Ikone i tajnoviti izvori hriãñanstva. Kragujevac: Kaleniñ. Tomadakis, Nikolaos B., Konstantinos A. Manafis, Grossmann Peter, at al. 1990. Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. ed. Manafis A. Konstantinos. Athens: George A. Christopoulos, John. C. Bastias.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

67

Uspenski, Leonid 2000. Teologija ikone. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Uspenski, Leonid, Vladimir Loski 2008. Smisao ikone. Jasen: Nikãiñ.

68

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Symbolism of the Feast of Pentecost: Written and Painted Sources
Resume This paper will discuss the symbolism of the Christian feast of Pentecost, through the written and painted sources. On the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descends on the apostles and restores the unity of God and people through the spiritual building of the Church. Also, this holiday is especially important because the Holy Spirit descends on each member of the Church and to everyone gives special gifts. The event in which the apostles speak different languages and understand each other is especially important. The particular gift, that occurs through the descend of the Holy Spirit is described in the feast’s icons of Pentecost. In accordance with fact that the picture through the history of Christianity had halting, but a very important role, in transmission of Tradition, emphasis of this work is on research of symbolism of single art elements (color, geometry, perspective), their origin and their role in transmitting of the invisible world by material means on the icon of Pentecost. Keywords: the Pentecost, icons, symbolism, the Holy Spirit.

69 Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu nikola.knezevic@nsts-online.org UDK 233.14 Primljeno: 01.04.2010 Prihvañeno: 05.04.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

KOMPARATIVNI PRISTUP: PECCATUM ORIGINALE
Rezime Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju poimanja termina prvorodnog greha (lat. peccatum originale) pre svega, u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije (lat. Imago Dei) u åoveku, odnosno, u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada, ili, taånije, u odnosu na ono ãto je od od te slike ostalo. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj, Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. Rimokatoliåka tradicija insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena, da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena, ali da nije i izgubljena. Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj, rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju poimanja ljudske prirode, åijoj razlici doprinosi i uvoœenje pojma donum superadditum. Nasuprot tome, u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koja podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. Kljuåne reåi: praroditeljski greh, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

åovek je izaãao iz ruke Boæije neporoåan. nego su prestupivãi zapovest Boæiju. bezgreãnosti. 2003: 2. Isto.dar Boæije blagodati. 6 . bezazlen. Åovekov zadatak nam je nagoveãten u åinjenici da je stvoren po obliåju Boæijem . buduñi neokrnjene grehom. svetlosti æivota. Ova obmana je izvedena spretno. bile odreœene za slobodno razvijanje u smeru savrãenstva. 5. bezgreãan.70 Teoloãki åasopis. nameñe ideju da su njegove duhovne sile. Takoœe. Stalna komunikacija sa Bogom bi omoguñila stvarnu besmrtnost .6 Naãi praroditelji nisu ostali u stanju prvobitne pravednosti. åovek je od Boga primio fiziåku i duhovnu snagu neophodnu za njegovo ostvarenje. njegov odnos sa Bogom i uslove u kojima je æiveo. tamu i smrt. åovekovo savrãenstvo je bilo relativno. telo bilo besmrtno. N° 9 Posedovanjem lika Boæijeg. Sablaænjivi zmijin predlog izaziva u Evinoj duãi oseñaj gordosti koji brzo prerasta u bogoboraåko raspoloæenje kojem se Eva radoznalo podaje i 1 2 3 4 5 6 Vidi: Popoviñ: 1980: 260.åovek nije sagreãio. Stvoren po liku Boæijem. åovek je postavljen iznad prirode i predodreœen je da bude posrednik izmeœu Tvorca i beslovesnih biña. i telesno savrãenstvo prvozdanog åoveka jeste bilo samo relativno. zaslaœena prividnom naivnoãñu. Tudoran. po prirodi. bestrasan. prema tome. non posse mori posse non mori Isto. prvobitno stanje je obeleæeno savrãenim skladom samoga åoveka. otpali od Boga.1 Stvoren radi visokog i uzviãenog cilja.da bi vladao zemljom i svim ãto je na zemlji. Pad bi bio neobjaãnjiv da smo zadræali to stanje moralnog savrãenstva.3 Ipak. bez moguñnosti da umre 4 veñ da je imalo moguñnost da ne umre 5 .2 Imajuñi u vidu svojstva kojima je åovek bio obdaren. i pali u greh. åovekovog odnosa sa Bogom i åovekovog odnosa sa beslovesnom prirodom. Netruleænost i besmrtnost telesna ne znaåi nuæno da je. svetosti i blaæenstva.

poseban dodatak åovekovim prirodnim silama (lat. justitia originalis). ali da nije i izgubljena. pre svega. taånije. Prvorodni greh je oduzeo Adamu prvobitnu pravednost (lat. u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije u åoveku. 272. u odnosu na ono ãto je od nje ostalo. bila povod pogubnog pada prvih ljudi.10 Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj. Prvorodni greh nije u potpunosti uniãtio slobodu åoveka te u njemu i dalje postoji odreœeno dobro kao i sposobnost upravljanja prema dobrom. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj. Vidi: Isto. da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena. odnosno. kao bogolikom sazdanju Boæijem. tako je zavist njegova prema åoveku.8 Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju åovekovog pada. Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Obraz Boæiji u åoveku nije u potpunosti izgubljen.7 Ovom svetopisamskom istinom o poreklu i uzroku greha i zla u svetu proæeta je sræ Svetog predanja. 14. rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju ljudske prirode. veñ „zatamnjen.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 71 svesno krãi Boæiju zapovest.“9 Katoliåka crkva insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena. ili. donum superadditum). Vidi: Tudoran. 1998: 138. Kao ãto je zavist œavola prema Bogu bila uzrok njegovom padu na nebu. u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada. Prvobitna pravednost nije bila organski.11 7 8 9 10 11 Vidi: Popoviñ. 302. Vidi: Justin Popoviñ. Æena navodi muæa da je u tome sledi i on dobrovoljno jede zabranjeni rod. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. veñ spoljaãni dar blagodati. Vidi: Franc Courth. odnosno sastavni deo åovekove duhovne i moralne prirode. jer prirodna teænja razuma i volje prema istini i dobru nije u potpunosti iãåezla. 273. ali nije naudio njegovoj prirodi. .

Kanoni sa sinode u Dortrehtu 1618-1619: 2007: 51. N° 9 Nasuprot tome. ..“16 Ipak. nije sigurno da se ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga.72 Teoloãki åasopis. poãto je greh zaposeo sve pore njegovog biña. sa viãe optimizma. 1989: 90. odnosno. 138. ali nije uniãtena. pogreãno je reñi da je iz åoveka u potpunosti iãåezla prirodna dobrota ili sloboda. iako tekst implicira njegovu pojavu i posledice. tvrdi sledeñe: „U åoveku je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo koje u njemu åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. Vidi: Bloesch. F. ãiri se. i poprima sve veñe dimenzije ostavljajuñi posledice zbog kojih trpi sav ljudski rod. veka. ali nije nestala. 1989: 90. nemoguñe da se okrene Bogu svojom voljom. Veñ se na poåetku starozavetne poruke nazire dinamika razvoja „grehovne sile“ koja pri padu prvosazdanih ljudi dobija svoj zamajac. Bente: 1921: XVIII poglavlje. slava Boæija je okrnjena. Imago Dei je potamnela.14 Augzburãko veroispovedanje. Vidi: Franc Courth. 1948: 644.13 Luter je smatrao da je åoveku. meœutim. u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koje prvobitno potiåe od blaæenog Avgustina12 i podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu.17 Svetopisamsko poimanje praroditeljskog greha U Starom zavetu ne postoji eksplicitno definisan praroditeljski greh.. kasniji uticaj greha na celo stvorenje. sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina kaæe „da je åoveku bez Boæije pomoñi nemoguñe åak i poåeti svoj put ka Bogu.“15 Reformisano veroispovedanje iz 17. niti je njime moguñe obratiti mu se. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Vidi: Augustine. Vidi: Bloesch.

Stihovima iz 1Moj 3 se dokazivao „uzroåni greh“ kojim je greh uãao u svet (lat.21 Pojam praroditeljskog greha je neãto odreœeniji u Novom zavetu. 2-3. 21. . pokaja se Gospod ãto je stvorio åoveka na zemlji. 5-6. i gle. 2003: 166. dobro beãe veoma. 5 i 8.23 Misao o univerzalnosti istorije spasenja u Hristu i o nesretnom dogaœaju sa Adamom izrazio je idejom korporativne specifiånosti. 46. 167. Vidi: Nemet. Po apostolu Pavlu. 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 Moj 1. Vidi: Isto. 23). peccatum originale originatum). a Adamova greãka ukazuje na to da kada je greh u pitanju.“ 19 Postoje mnoga mesta u Starom zavetu koja direktno svedoåe o tome da su svi ljudi. 1Car 8. 5 (7) definisao dogmu o praroditeljskom grehu. Rim 3. druãtvene posledice greha i liånu odgovornost poåinioca – svaki greh je greh protiv Saveza i liåni greh protiv Boga. bez izuzetaka. meœu ljudima nema razlike: „Kao ãto je napisano: Nema ni jednog pravednog. dok se stihom iz Psalma dokazivalo greãno stanje sveta i åoveka (lat. 31. Ps 13.“22 Apostol Pavle se ovde bavi Adamom jer mu on otvara moguñnost da govori o uticaju Hrista koji je sveopãti. kao i greh. 15. odnosno.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 73 Uporedimo reåi Stvoritelja na vrhuncu ãestodneva: „Tada pogleda Bog sve ãto je stvorio. peccatum originale originans).“ 18 sa kasnijom konstatacijom: „I Gospod videñi da je nevaljalstvo ljudsko veliko na zemlji. U proroåkoj i mudrosnoj literaturi Starog zaveta se postepeno razvija individualistiåko shvatanje greha i njegovih posledica. i da su sve misli srca njihovog svagda samo zle. Uporedi: Rim 5.20 Tridentski sabor je tekstovima iz 1Moj 3 i Ps 51. Starozavetna poruka jasno naglaãava dvojnost greha. sagreãili (1Moj 6. Adam predstavlja jedinstvo ljudskog roda. i bi mu æao u srcu. Jer 13. 9-10. Savremena egzegeza ovakvo tumaåenje smatra spornim zbog nedostatka konteksta. 1 Moj 6.

patnje. Prevashodno. kako uma. bol. tako i volje.26 Takvo stanje savrãentsva podrazumeva i åinjenicu da je åovek sazdan kao biñe kojem su bile strane bolesti. Prvi åovek je bio savrãen u tom smislu ãto je i njegovo duhovno i fiziåko bilo na najviãem stepenu i omoguñavalo mu je da ispuni svoj zadatak. 1998:108. . Grigorije Niski. njegova volja savrãenu pravednost i dobrotu. 4. a samim tim slobodnim kada je u pitanju volja. åovek je stvoren kao slovesno. bez sklonosti ka grehu. kada najviãem åinu svoga stvaranja daje moguñnost da se okrene od njega. Grigorije Niski. 6. slobodna volja ljudskog biña postaje oruœe njegovog ropstva. Adam nije imao apsolutno spoznajno i moralno savrãenstvo. ali sa moguñnoãñu da sagreãi. Zavist jednog od nekada najveñih meœu heruvimima. svojom 24 25 26 27 Vidi: Courth. on joã uvek nije bio moralno dovrãena liånost. koje su postale delom åovekove prirode nakon njegovog pada u greh i koje su posledica ogrehovljenja same åovekove prirode. „izumitelja zla“ kako ga joã naziva Sv. Naæalost. kao ãto je Hrist predvodnik izbavljenih. Vidi: Isto. ujedinjenog savrãenstva i pravde. Vidi: Tudoran.27 Na kraju. slobodno biñe sa moguñnoãñu da odluåuje. Sv. U ovome se najbolje oåitava veliåina Boæije intervencije i veliåina Stvoritelja samog. kao biñe koje je posedovalo slobodnu volju. dakle.“25 Stvorio ga je Bog. Njegov um je posedovao brojna znanja.74 Teoloãki åasopis. 2001: 208 (poglavlje 26).24 Istoåna tradicija Pravoslavno uåenje stanje prvosazdanog åoveka objaãnjava na ovaj naåin: „Stanje nevinosti ili odsustva greha … nepoznavanje greha ili nedostatak æelje za ogrehovljenjem… Pre no ãto je sagreãio Adam je bio u stanju harmonije. N° 9 Adam je predak apostola naroda i tip greãnog åoveåanstva.

kao kategorija i zakon greha koji æivi u åoveku i dejstvuje u njemu i kroz njega.29 Greãnost ljudske prirode. Vidi: Isto."28 Tako nastaje prvi greh.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 75 ruãilaåkom tendencijom uspeva da zavede ljudsko biñe i tako dovede do promene njegove same prirode . osiromaãenja i smrtnosti. Jasno je. Iako su praroditelji traæili opravdanje za sebe u nagovoru zmije. greh koji je uåinio otac ljudskog roda. bolesti. . samim tim i greh sa svim svojim posledicama i kaznama . potiåuñi od Adama. 295. to jest. on ne podrazumeva apriori i „nasleœenu krivicu“. 290. da prvosazdani ljudi snose krivicu za grehopad. 28 29 30 31 Serafim Rouz. dakle. Åovekov Pad: 3. Najzad. oskrnavljenost srca. ali se ta krivica ne prenosi na potomke. stradanja i smrt.otuda i naziv prvorodni ili praroditeljski greh. Gospoda Isusa Hrista. mnogo viãe im je naãkodila njihova vlastita æelja nego nagovor zmije. Naslednost prvorodnog greha sveopãta je. Buduñi da je Adam bio otac celog åoveåanstva. preneo je svoju palu prirodu na svoje potomstvo. veñ podrazumeva osobinu svakog pojedinca da se lakãe upravlja prema zlu nego prema dobru. Vidi: Popoviñ. jer niko od ljudi nije izuzet od toga osim Bogoåoveka. Sveti Jefrem Sirijski kaæe da je Adam u sebi posedovao potencijal za ovakav ishod: „Reå iskuãenja ne bi odvela u greh one ãto su iskuãavani da kuãaåa nije rukovodila njihova sopstvena æelja. œavolje iskuãenje je uspelo zbog toga ãto je on znao (ili je pretpostavljao) ãta se nalazi u srcu samoga åoveka.31 Vaæno je reñi da u pravoslavnoj antropologiji nasledni greh nema Avgustinske implikacije. pomraåenje razuma. iskvarenost volje. Vidi: Isto. drvo bi svojom lepotom uvelo njihova srca u rat. 287. Ovakav prestup Boæije zapovesti poslediåno postaje grehom celog ljudskog roda.30 Na ceo ljudski rod kao deo izmenjene åovekove prirode prenose se i sve posledice pada: unakaæenost lica Boæijeg. Åak i da kuãaå nije doãao. projavljuje se u svima bez izuzetka kao neko æivo greãno naåelo.njenog ograniåenja.

Vidi: Tudoran.76 Teoloãki åasopis. 35 Kako je to svojevremeno govorio Sv. tvrdi pravoslavni bogoslov Kalistos Ver. ljudska biña su postala podloæna bolesti. sa Bogom i sa prirodom: telo se viãe ne pokorava duãi. Grigorije Niski. otuœen tako od samoga sebe i oslabljene volje. Liãen zajednice sa Bogom. podelu izmeœu sebe i prirodnog sveta. U fiziåkom smislu.33 Pad ljudskog biña ontoloãki menja celokupno stvorenje. podelu unutar samoga sebe i drugih ljudi. Vidi: Ware. te ih åak ni poznanici ne mogu raspoznati. åovek postaje rob greha.32 Umesto do savrãentstva i oboæenja. Greh naruãava harmoniju åoveka sa samim sobom. kod ljudskog biña je doãlo do izopaåenja i gubitka dostojanstva koje je bilo ravno anœeoskom.36 „Tako je åovek. 8. frustracije. Åovek je postao predmet unutraãnjeg otuœenja. Grigorije Niski. a kada mu sluæi. 1980: 282. Vidi: Sv.“ 37 32 33 34 35 36 37 Ware. krenuli su putem otuœenosti od Boga i sopstvene prirode. åini to sa naporom. veñ teæi da je zavede. veñ se prostire i na beslovesne æivotinje i na beslovesnu prirodu. on je prouzrokovao podelu. veliko i dragoceno stvorenje. N° 9 Prestupanjem zapovesti prvosazdani ljudi podlegli su Sataninoj obmani i promaãili svoje prvobitno naznaåenje. priroda viãe ne sluæi åoveku. Umesto da igra ulogu posrednika i ujedinitelja. 1979: 60. bolu. 2001: 121. sliåno onima koji su iz nesmotrenosti upali u blato i ukaljali lice svoje. . (17:2) Popoviñ. izgubio je lik netruleænog Boga i kroz greh se obukao u lik truleæi i praãine. „pad nije ograniåen samo na ljudski rod.“34 Posledice pada ljudskog roda bile su fiziåkog i moralnog karaktera. i do oblaåenja u smrtnost. U moralnom smislu. Romanidis. taãtina i depresija su postale svakodnevnica ljudskog roda. postao je neprijatelj samome sebi. 2001: 40. starosti i na kraju smrti. 1979: 59. liãio sebe svog dostojanstva upavãi u blato greha.

delimiåno slobodna. saåuvala dobrota Boæija. Naglaãavajuñi ovo. to je protivno ljudskoj prirodi kojoj je mnogo lakãe da se rukovodi upravo suprotnim. primili smrtnu presudu. lik Boæiji u åoveku nije uniãten. åoveåanstvo po svaku cenu mora biti krivac za pad. Romanidis kaæe sledeñe: „Ako se jednom prihvati da propadljivost i smrt predstavljaju kaznu od Boga za sve ljude. o duhovnoj smrti kada kaæe za prvosazdane ljude da su „u trenutku kad su åuli reåi: prah si i u prah ñeã se vratiti. pomraåen i unakaæen. Romanidis. tada se stvara bezizlaz u vezi sa prenoãenjem smrti i propadljivosti na potomke Adamove. postali smrtni i moæemo reñi. veñ naprotiv. odnosno. pre svega. Da bi se. . veñ. Za razliku od rimokatoliåke antropologije koja unakaæenje lika vidi kao gubitak åovekove „prvobitne pravednosti“.“38 Posledica toga je i fiziåka smrt. 1980: 282. zbog boæanske ljubavi prema åoveku. ipak. pod tim predpostavkama. posle pada. Åovekova volja ostaje samo uslovno. Sveti Jovan Zlatousti govori. kada je u pitanju pravoslavna antropologija. 2001: 234. Popoviñ.“40 Ljudsko biñe je i dalje sposobno da se opredeljuje prema dobru. Bog je dopustio smrt ne zbog nekakvog kaænjeniåkog raspoloæenja boæanske pravednosti. umrli. Åovekov Pad: 8. zaklju38 39 40 Serafim Rouz. u pravoslavnoj antropologiji. ali. i ljudski rod je doæiveo fiziåku smrt. kako je to rekao ava Justin: „duboko povreœen. natprirodnog i inputiranog dara koji na taj naåin i nije åinio deo ogranske prirode åoveka. U odnosu na poreklo smrti.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 77 Poãto se priroda ljudskog biña ontoloãki promenila. vrlo je vaæno reñi da nije Bog tvorac smrti veñ œavo. Na osnovu ljudske istorije.“39 Ono ãto pravoslavnu antropologiju åini autentiånom i najoptimistiånijom jeste upravo njeno poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku nakon grehopada. i manje optimistiånih tumaåenja protestanskog stanoviãta „potpune iskvarenosti“.

Boæanski lik u åoveku.42 Zapadna tradicija U prethodnim poglavljima je veñ bilo reåi o rimokatoliåkom. Razmatrajuñi åovekov pad i posledice pada iz perspektive zapadne hriãñanske tradicije i poredeñi ga sa stanoviãtem pravoslavne antropologije. a razlikuje se od nje u odnosu na posledice pada i dalje soterioloãke implikacije. po milosti Boæijoj. 41 Sumirajuñi stanoviãte pravoslavne tradicije po ovom pitanju. 62. prema tome. Apostol Pavle. Protestanska antropologija je sliåna pravoslavnoj u odnosu na prirodu åoveka. povratak na poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku je neizbeæan i prvenstveno. te mu je. nailazimo na manje ili viãe opreåna stanoviãta. neophodan. åime se podrazumeva da on i dalje poseduje odreœeno bogopoznanje. meœutim. 41 42 Rim 1. protestantskom pogledu na imago Dei. odnosno. na razliåite naåine gledaju na prirodu ljudskog biña. Pravoslavna i rimokatoliåka antropologija se podudaraju u tvrdnji da je lik Boæiji u åoveku posle grehopada osiromaãen. N° 9 åujemo da je åoveku data moguñnost bogopoznanja kako o tome svedoåi i Sv. Sagledañemo poimanje pada ljudskog biña u greh i njegove posledice sa stanoviãta rimokatoliåke i protestanske antropologije. åovek je joã uvek sposoban za poærtvovanje i samilost. 19 . omoguñeno da stupi u zajedniãtvo sa Bogom. Åak i u palom svetu. . ostao je zamuñen ali ne i uniãten.78 Teoloãki åasopis.20. ukljuåujuñi i slobodu izbora koju on ima. Vidi: Ware. na prvi pogled. kako to tvrde neka pesimistiånija kalvinistiåka stanoviãta. ali u manjoj meri. Kalistos Ver kaæe da ona (pravoslavna tradicija) bez umanivanja samih posledica pada ne smatra da je pad rezultirao „totalnom iskvarenoãñu”. Kada se razmatra problematika pada ljudskog biña.

te. prema Avgustinu je u poremeñenom odnosu prema Bogu. O ovome vidi viãe u Justin: 1980: 301-307. imaju nasledni greh od kojeg se oslobaœaju krãtenjem. kako jedni smatraju. greh nije neãto supstancijalno i ne pripada prirodi åoveka.46 a kako drugi smatraju. Nemet. po uåenju Pelagija. Pelagije je engleski monah iz åetvrtog veka åije je uåenje proglaãeno jeretiåkim. 110. jer ako je Hrist umro za sve. s obzirom da greh zavisi iskljuåivo od slobodne volje. 46 47 . Ãtaviãe. 1980: 300.47 Avgustin polazi od razmiãljanja o crkvenoj praksi krãtenja dece koja podrazumeva da su deca greãnici. Razvio je teoriju o poreklu i naslednosti greha. shvatanje spasenja i praksa krãtenja su bili uobiåajeno povezani s priznavanjem odreœenog greãnog stanja u kojem se åovek nalazi. Po Pelagiju. 108. u 43 44 45 Vidi: Isto. Bit praroditeljskog greha. do potpune pokvarenosti åoveka. åovek moæe biti bez greha. bez uticaja Boæanskog.45 Avgustin produbljuje teoloãki smisao pokvarenosti åoveka. Vidi: Nemet: 2003: 173. to jest.44 U jeku rasprave blaæenog Avgustina sa Pelagijem. prema tome. greh je potpuno sluåajna trenutna pojava koja niåe jedino u oblasti slobodne volje i to poãto se u njoj razvije sloboda koja ga jedina moæe proizvesti. Ovom temom su se bavili joã i Sv. onda su svi greãni i svi imaju potrebu za otkupljenjem i spasenjem. Irinej Lionski i Tertulian: polazili su od istine da je otkupljenje potrebno svima. boreñi se protiv markionizma i gnosticizma. do suprotne krajnosti. do taåke kristalizacije.43 Veñ u prvim vekovima. Greh je ono ãto se moæe izbeñi. Vidi: Courth. Vidi: Justin. jer iako moralno nevina. dovodeñi ga. Meliton Sardski govori o grehu koji je ljudski rod nasledio od Adama. 2003: 174.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 79 Crkvena tradicija Joã krajem drugog veka. åovek je i dalje u moguñnosti da bira izmeœu dobra i zla. Meliton pod nasledstvom podrazumeva nesretno stanje åoveka koje ga podjarmljuje i zavodi na greh.

“ tako i kaznu koju je Stvoritelj. koje je na ovim saborima i zvaniåno prihvañeno. zbog Adamove neposluãnosti. godine na koji ñe se skoro hiljadu godina kasnije pozivati na Tridentskom saboru. Sabor je pre svega posmatrao odnos ranjene prirode ljudskog biña i milosti spasenja. govori o poæudi koja se smatra nasledstvom od prvosazdanog åoveka i samim tim i izvorom liånih greha.51 Sabori u Kartagini i Oranæu Teoloãka rasprava sa Pelagijem i njegovim uåenjem dovela je do sazivanja crkvenog sabora afriåkih crkava 418. na osnovu uverenja o greãnom stanju u kojem se nalazi svaki Adamov potomak. praroditeljski greh podrazumeva. veñ i realno greãnim biñem koje u njemu postoji i kojim se unapred odreœuje za veånu osudu. 48 49 50 51 52 Vidi: Courth. Vidi: Isto. Sabor na kojem se dalje razvijalo stanoviãte zapadne crkve o praroditeljskom grehu bio je sabor u Oranæu 529. kako „razjedninjenje åoveka. 207. Marengo. ne moæemo pozvati na odgovornost. ne samo nekom opãtom pokvarenoãñu koja mu prethodi. 2003: 206. 114. premda ga ona uslovljava. povezano s duãevnom smrñu.80 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Scola.“ 50 Kao takav. i za koju ga. . Vidi: Courth.52 Nesumnjivo je da je na oba sabora Avgustinovo shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. N° 9 oholosti i samoljublju.48 Hiponski biskup.49 Avgustinova nauka o praroditeljskom grehu suãtinski se svodi na åinjenicu da åovek „dolazi na svet obeleæen. 1998: 111. Isto. nametnuo svim ljudima. imalo presudan znaåaj i veliki uticaj. Prades. Na crkvenom saboru je bilo prihvañeno nekoliko kanona i odluka koje su se odnosile na pojam i shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. godine u Kartagini. 116.

56 Formalna priroda praroditeljskog greha je odreœena njegovim uzrokom koji je suprotan prvobitnoj milosti koja se sastoji iz posluãnosti ljudskog biña Boæijoj volji. 120.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 81 Nakon sabora u Oranæu vekovima nije postojalo veñe interesovanje za problematiku praroditeljskog greha ali je izvesno interesovanje u srednjem veku formiralo stav da se prisutnost sluåajne pokvarenosti ljudske naravi. 57 Vaæno je spomenuti i ulogu „prvobitne“ pravednosti u åoveku. koja. 53 Toma Akvinski U 13. Vidi. Toma Akvinski ulogu prvobitne milosti vidi kao ravnoteæu 53 54 55 56 57 Vidi: Scola. definisao je praroditeljski greh kao sintezu dva elementa: potpunog gubitka54 izvorne ili prvobitne pravednosti55 kao formalnoga elementa i poæude kao materijalnog elementa. Vidi: Fairweather. Praroditeljski greh predstavlja. kao materijalni element. predstavlja gubitak sklada duãevnih elemenata . sledeñi Anselma iz Aoste i koristeñi se skolastiåkom terminologijom. Isto. Prades. na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha se gleda i kao na moralnu solidarnost ljudskog roda sa Adamom. Gubitak prvobitne milosti predstavlja formalnu prirodu praroditeljskog greha. 124. Svaka poæuda. poåevãi od Adama. poãto je Adam uzor åovekovog morala i predstavnika celog åoveåantsva. 1954: 124. Toma Akvinski. Marengo. kako ga joã Akvinski naziva. Takoœe. . umrtvljenost ljudske prirode.Akvinski razum i intelekt smatra duãevnim elementima koji su usmereni prema dobru dok je „niæi“ deo duãe usmeren ka zlu. Vidi: Isto. veku jedan on najveñih teologa katoliåke crkve. sve ljude stavlja u poloæaj neprijateljstva prema Bogu. prepoznaje u prisutnosti poæude. Vidi: Isto. 121. 208.

. i na hamartiologiju Katoliåke crkve upãte. po Akvinskom. Vidi: Bloesh. ili je samo izmenjena njena moguñnost da se usmerava ka dobrom. njegovim umom. problematika praroditeljskog greha dobija drugaåiji naglasak. bez Boæije intervencije. nakon grehopada povreœena. Vidi: Popoviñ. N° 9 izmeœu duãevnih elemenata (razum. Greh zahvata sve pore ljudskog biña i onemoguñava mu da se okrene Bogu sopstvenom voljom. 126. stanje bez blagodati?59 Tomistiåko viœenje praroditeljskog greha je nesumljivo ostavilo traga na veliki Sabor koji ñe uslediti nekoliko vekova kasnije. u jeku reformacije. Da li bi bilo potrebno stavljati elemente u ravnoteæu da „niæi“ deo duãe nije i pre Adamovog pada bio usmeren ka zlu? Da li je doctor Angelicus ukazao na manihejski dualizam ljudske prirode i pre njegovog pada. srcem.60 Luter je opisao åoveka zarobljenog grehom kao incurvatus-a (savijen prema sebi). Treñi ålan treñeg poglavlja kanona sa sabora u Dortu glasi ovako: 58 59 60 61 62 Vidi: Isto. veku. 1989: 91.58 Imajuñi ovo u vidu. Nije jasno da li je priroda åoveka. 302. pioniri reformacije. 1957: 261.62 Ljudsko biñe se raœa pokvareno.61 a njegovu pokvarenost kao „duboku i zlu“.82 Teoloãki åasopis. zakljuåujemo da justitia originalis po Akvinskom nije bila organski deo ljudske prirode. odnosno. Isto: 96. Vidi: Calvin. Luter i Kalvin gledali su na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha kao na silu koja je u potpunosti ovladala ljudskim biñem. i svim njegovim delima. Reformacija U 16. jer ako jeste. intelekt i niæi delovi duãe). Sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina. kako bi onda priroda nakon grehopada mogla da ostane u neizmenjenom stanju? Da li to znaåi da se ljudsko biñe nakon grehopada vraña u svoje prirodno stanje.

nismo u moguñnosti sami od sebe da åinimo.sa- 65 Drugo Helvetsko veroispovedanje. umrli u grehu i robovi greha. nepoverenja.htm 66 67 68 Brunner. 2007: 50. Bloesh. i volja ljudskog biña nije u potpunosti zarobljena. skloni zlu. dodavãi pritom. Vidi: Catholic Encyclopedia. veñ poniãtava njegovo pripisivanje åoveku. Barth. Karl Bart opisuje åoveka kao „korenito i potpuno pokvarenog“. osude i mrænje prema Bogu. nesposobni za svako spasonosno delo. suprotno katoliåkom uåenju. veñ je u nemoguñnosti da usmerava åoveka da iãta uradi u pogledu svog spasenja bez uticaja Boæanske spasonosne milosti. da krãtenje ne poniãtava krivicu praroditeljskog greha. 94.com/chr/2helvcnf. 1959: 500. i time otklanja prokletstvo greha sa ljudskog biña. veñ je samo potamnela.deo slike Boæije je ostao u ljudskoj prirodi. ne æele. a ne samo jedan njen deo66 .“65 Bruner smatra da je greh promenio i izopaåio celokupnu ljudsku prirodu. Concupiscense. niti se mogu vratiti Bogu. 1953. kao izopaåenje ljudske prirode i kao samu suãtinu ljudskog greha. åak ni da mislimo ni o åemu dobrom.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet „Svi ljudi su zaåeti u grehu i raœaju se kao sinovi gneva. Bez milosti Duha Svetoga koji preporaœa. Åovek i dalje poseduje takozvanu graœansku pravednost (lat. http://www. cred-texts.64 Reåi osmog poglavlja Drugog Helvetskog veropispovedanja imaju radikalniji prizvuk: „Puni zloñe (=ljudi). moguñnost da i dalje razumom u svakodnevnom æivotu 63 64 Kanoni sa sinoda u Dordrechtu. niti mogu ispraviti izopaåenu narav i tu doneti poboljãanje. .67 a ipak smatra da slika Boæija nije nestala iz åoveka. 137. odnosno.68 Takoœe. civilis justitia).“63 83 Luter je definisao znaåenje reåi concupiscentia neãto drugaåije.

Van Baren. za delove mudrosti i istina koje su prisutne u nehriñanskim religijama. Ovakvo tumaåenje radikalizuje pojam potpune pokvarenosti i ne predstavlja suãtinu poruke koju su Kalvin i kasnije sabor u Dortu ispovedali. kao i imago Dei. a posebno Kalvinizma. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. kao i za moralna naåela koja se 69 70 71 72 Hanko.71 U ljudskom biñu je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo: „Zahvaljujuñi tome. N° 9 delimiåno razlikuje dobro i zlo. iako je moguñnost ove spoznaje svedena na minimum. . Stanoviãte protestanske provenijencije. Herman. Ona podrazumeva da je svaki deo ljudskog biña oãteñen grehom.84 Teoloãki åasopis. joã uvek poseduje sposobnost za spoznaju pravednosti. Opãta milost omoguñava odreœene spoznaje o Bogu. imago Dei u åoveku jeste oãteñena ali ona joã uvek postoji. Ãta je taåno obuhvañeno ovim pojmom? Potrebno je pojaãnjenje ovog pojma da bismo izbegli njegovo radikalno razumevanje. okrnjena je ali nije uniãtena. 69 Potpuna pokvarenost predstavlja rezultat pada ljudskog biña u greh. po pitanju praroditeljskog greha se najåeãñe povezuje sa pojmom potpune pokvarenosti. odnosno. kako o tome svedoåi 11.70 Nasuprot tome. te razlikuje izmeœu onoga ãto je åasno i neåasno. Dakle. doprinose tome da ljudsko biñe. Suãtina razumevanja pojma je u razlikovanju potpunog od apsolutnog. ålan Augzburãkog veroispovedanja. ali istovremeno naglaãava da ljudsko biñe nije pokvareno u celosti. 50. Vidi: Bloesh: 90. i pokazuje neko nastojanje oko kreposti i discipline. ono åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. Isto. 1976. apsolutna pokvarenost implicira iskvarenost ljudskog biña u celini (u njemu ne ostaje ni trunke dobra) i nemoguñnost razlikovanja dobra od zla. ãto pruæa objaãnjenje za delimiåno Bogopoznanje.“72 Opãta Boæija milost.

95. iako je njegova sloboda znaåajno oslabljena i oãteñena. govorio je Luter. jer se åovek ne koristi ispravno prirodnim i graœanskim stvarima. Åitav åovek je biser. naruãen je. Åovek je i dalje odgovoran pred Bogom.73 Ovo svetlo ipak nije dovoljno za dolaæenje do Bogopoznanja koje vodi ka spasenju: „Ali nije sigurno da se s ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga niti je moguñe njemu se obratiti. sva njegova dobra dela zaraæena su greãnom motivacijom ili namisli. jer celo njegovo biñe odraæava slavu njegovog Stvoritelja. biti bez isprike pred Bogom“74 Buduñi da je ljudsko biñe delimiåno u moguñnosti da åini dela pravednosti i da doœe do odreœenog stepena moralnih vrlina.75 Postoji izvesna polarizovanost stanoviãta protestantskih teologa po pitanju shvatanja ljudske prirode posle grehopada. 50. Bloesh. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. ali ne i Boga. odraz Boæijeg biña u åoveku. Donald Bloã. åovek je æalosno okrnjen biser. i zadræati ga u nepravdi. ali nije uniãten. Bloesh. i tako dok neãto åini. jer se okrenuo od Boga da bi postigao vlastite ciljeve. odliåno je defisao sloæenu postavku kompleskne teoloãke postavke: „Imago Dei. 91.“76 73 74 75 76 Vidi: Bloesh: 91. . i naprotiv.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 85 mogu videti u kulturama najstarijih civilizacija. pa samim tim. savremeni protestanski teolog. Govoriti o apsolutnoj iskvarenosti kao opãtem stanoviãtu unutar protestantizma bilo bi suviãe jednostrano. Ljudskom pravednoãñu se moæe steñi poãtovanje i divljenje ljudi. pokuãava na razliåite naåine ugasiti ovo svetlo. iz Boæijeg ugla. ona neprihvatljiva... ipak.

86 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Nemet. godine. prema tome. U 5. vraña åoveka u odnos prijateljstva sa Bogom. sabor naglaãava kako ova sveta tajna u potpunosti i u njegovoj biti briãe praroditeljski greh. godine proglaãeno 6 kanona o praroditeljskom grehu. nego da je za to potrebna i vera pojedinca. izmeœu 1545-1563. veñ potomstvom i poreklom. sledeñi Sv.79 U 2. Apostola Pavla. kanonu ispoveda se da se praroditeljski greh ne prenosi oponaãanjem. 140.83 U 6.78 U 1. Nemet. 184. .84 Tridentski sabor je bio od velikog znaåaja za poimanje praroditeljskog greha i za razvoj æivota unutar Katoliåke crkve dobar deo Sabora je bio posveñen raspravama o crkvenim tajnama. N° 9 Tridentski Sabor Kao odgovor na teoloãke i eklesioloãke izazove Reformacije. kanonu se istiåe neutralan stav u odnosu na bezgreãno zaåeñe Majke Boæije. U 4. 141. odræan je Tridentski77 sabor. Na saboru je 17. Tridentski sabor je naglasio naåelnu neophodnost spasenja svih ljudi 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Danaãnji Trento. kanonu crkveni oci. kanonu se razmatra Luterovo poimanje krãtenja 81 i nasuprot Luteru. kanonu dekreta sabor se odreœuje prema tradiciji anselmovsko – tomistiåkog poimanja praroditeljskog greha kao gubitka iskonske svetosti i pravednosti.80 U 3. Vidi: Courth. Isto. veka. Waterworth: 1848.82 Krãtenje. kanonu se istiåe vaænost krãtenja dece. 2003: 180. Vidi: Courth. juna 1546. Italija. 21. J. 21. Luter je smatrao da krãtenje ne briãe u potpunosti praroditeljski greh. naglaãavaju da se praroditeljski greh prenosi i odnosi na celo åoveåanstvo. sredinom 16. Ni na jednom drugom saboru do tada nije bilo potrebe za odluåivanjem o tako vaænim pitanjima pod tako teãkim okolnostima.

Vidi: Nemet. . nauånog objaãnjenja porekla æivota na zemlji i stvaranja sveta uopãte. donekle je smanjio teoloãke tenzije izmeœu Katoliåke crkve i Protestantizma.88 85 86 87 88 Vidi: Isto. Vidi: Humani Generis. Takoœe. Vidi: Isto. naizgled suprostavljene strane. odnosno Adam. 2003. Spremao se novi izazov za teologiju: na koji naåin odgovoriti na savremena nauåna pitanja i da li je moguñe pomiriti ove dve.86 Joã 1950. veka. ålanu je potvrœen monogenizam i åinjenica da Adam nije metaforiåki prikaz viãe parova i snaæno je naglaãena åinjenica da je greh poåinio pojedinac. i da se taj greh preneo na celo njegovo potomstvo. razvoja prirodnih nauka. ålan 36. i poåetkom 20. 143. poziva bogoslove da pokuãaju da pomire nauåno i versko shvatanje porekla æivota.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 87 i znaåaj krãtenja kao svete tajne koja briãe praroditeljski greh (sa ostatkom poæude kao posledice praroditeljskog greha). 185. ponovo se budi interesovanje za pojmom praroditeljskog greha.85 Savremena shvatanja praroditeljskog greha Krajem 19. zbog novih erminevtiåkih pristupa. u 36. godine. Tako se.87 U 37. U ovakvom druãtvenom stanju svesti mnogi bogoslovi su traæili put ka sintezi verskih istina i dostignuña savremene nauke. kao i zbog mnogih arheoloãkih otkriña. ålan 37. papa Pije XII u svojoj enciklici pod nazivom „Humani generis“. ali da je za stvaranje åovekove duãe zasluæan samo Bog. ålanu enciklike istiåe da je moguñe da ljudsko telo ima svoj evolutivni poredak. primera radi. novih filosofskih tendencija i poimanja sveta.

da bude pred Bogom. koji je joã jednom naglasio vaænost åinjenice da Adamov greh ne moæe biti inputiran u nas.92 Åovek je pao u okrilje greha voœen æeljom „da bude kao Bog. N° 9 Drugi vatikanski sabor89 se nije posebno osvrtao na pitanje praroditeljskog greha. Vidi: Isto. godine. jer ona predstavlja delo liåne slobode pojedinca (=Adama) u kojoj je osoba jedinstvena i niko ne moæe da zauzme njeno mesto. Isto. Rahner.“90 Takoœe. otvorio ga je Papa Jovan XXIII. joã jednom naglaãava nemoguñnost åoveka da se bori protiv zla u sebi bez Boæije pomoñi. Katehizam definiãe sadræaj praroditeljskog greha kao gubitak poverenja u Stvoritelja. 1993: ålan 397. ålan 13. ålan 400. veñ je njegovu formulaciju ostavio u okvirima koji su utvœeni na Tridentskom saboru. Vidi: Isto. Vaæno je spomenuti i miãljenje Karla Ranera. .91 Veliki znaåaj pojmu praroditeljskog greha nesumnjivo daje i Katehizam Katoliåke Crkve.1965. izmeœu svetlosti i tame. 1982: 111. Formulacija Sabora o praroditeljskom grehu je kratka i jasna i joã jednom naglaãava podeljenost åovekove prirode. ålan 398.88 Teoloãki åasopis.“93 Posledice pada su gubitak prvobitne pravednosti i iskvarenost slike Boæije u åoveku. vaæan dokument sa kraja proãlog veka koji je okupio najvaænije bogoslove Katoliåke crkve. Vidi: Cathehism of Catholic Church.94 Posledice pada i iskvarenosti ljudske prirode prenose se na celokupno stvorenje95 kao i na sve 89 Odræan izmeœu 1962 . zatvorio Papa Pavle VI. 90 91 92 93 94 95 Gaudium et Spes. biña u kome se vodi „dramatiåna borba izmeœu dobra i zla. zloupotrebu date slobode i neposluãnost prema Boæijoj zapovesti. ålan 399. velikog bogoslova Katoliåke crkve iz proãloga veka. ali bez Boga. ali ne i u saglasnosti sa njim. pa se ni liåna Adamova krivica ne moæe na nas preneti.

http://www. stavljaju danaãnje bogoslove pred novi i nimalo lak zadatak. ranjena i teæi97 ka grehu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 89 Adamove potomke. da doprinese i novim pogledima na shvatanje praroditeljskog greha.htm Vidi: Isto. Nema sumnje da savremena sekularizacija druãtva i devijacija moralno – kulturnih normi i obrazaca. odnosno. u buduñnosti. Latinska reå concupiscentia oznaåa unutraãnju teænju i sklonost ljudskog biña da åini greh. Nemet. 98 99 .99 Izazovi u vidu najnovijih nauånih dostignuña i savremene kulture koja teæi ka tome da trivijalizuje i relazivizuje pojam greha uopãte. greh je nasleœen ali ne i poåinjen. ålan 402.96 Iako se greh prenosi na sve potomke. izazovi egzistencijalistiåkih. kao i njihov zajedniåki dijalog sa protestanskim denominacijama.org/cathen/04208a. prihvatajuñi stanoviãta opreåna crkvenom uåenju kao opãte prihvañene normative. odgovora na izazove koje pruæa postmodernistiåko druãtvo. moæe. Catholic Encyclopedia. ålan 405. 2003: 189. kao i generalizovanju jednog svehriãñanskog stanoviãta. nihilistiåkih i naturalistiåkih svetonazora zahtevaju ozbiljan pristup i odgovor od strane hriãñanskih provenijencija.98 Drugim reåima. Pribliæavanje bogoslovskih stavova Pravoslavne i Rimokatoliåke crkve. on ne nosi i liånu krivicu za Adamov greh. ljudska priroda nije u potpunosti iskvarena.newadvent. iako je oãteñena. Vidi o tome viãe: Concupiscense. Niske pobude suprotne razumu. 96 97 Vidi: Isto.

The Westiminster Press. Grigorije Niski. Œakovo: Forum bogoslova.VA: John Knox Press. Concordia Publishing House. Krãñanska antropologija. Brunner.90 Teoloãki åasopis. Calvin. N° 9 CITIRANA DELA Bloesh. Dau 1921. Courth. Franc 1998. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. G. H. MI. The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 1. F. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 2. Grand Rapids. Sveti 2001. Louis. . Barth. Fairweather. Donald 1989. M 1954. Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. The Institutes of the Christian Religion. John 1957. A. Bloesh. Donald 1989. Karl 1959. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Lutheran Church St. Emil 1953. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. T. Nature and grace: Selections from the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas Philadephia. G. Bente and W. O stvaranju åoveka. The Humanity of God Richmond. Beograd: Biblioteka Obraz Svetaåki. Philadelphia:The Westminster Press.

Popoviñ. Herman. Teologija stvaranja. Justin 1980. Popadiñ. New Ed. Marengo. Ladislav 2003. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 2. Kanoni sa sinode u Dorthrehtu 1618 – 1619. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Beograd. Jasmin. Åovekov Pad. adresa: www. Dimitrije 2007. Reformed Free Publishing Association. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Novi Sad: Beseda. Rouz. Zagreb. Manastir Kelije. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Scola.verujem. Stanje åoveka pre i posle pada.org Nemet. Popoviñ. Zagreb. Tudoran. Prades 2003. Herder & Herder.org Romanidis. Miliñ. Manastir Kelije. Åovjek kao osoba.verujem. Jovan 2001. Justin 1980. Van Baren 1976. . www. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Novi Sad: Krãñanski centar „Dobroga Pastira“ i Teoloãki fakultet – Novi Sad. Rahner.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 91 Hanko. Fundations of Christian Faith. Isidor 2003. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 1. Five Points of Calvinism Michigan. Osijek. Karl 1982. Beograd. Serafim nd. Praroditeljski greh.

92

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Ware, Kallistos 1979. The Orthodox Way New York, St Vladimirs Seminary Press. Pope, Hugh T. 1910. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. New York, Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Palmieri A. 1911. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI, New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Pope Pius XII 1950. Humani Generis: Encyclical of Popr Pius XII, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/ documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html Pope Poul VI 1965. Gaudium et Spes: Pastoral constitution n the church in the modern world, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/ archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_co ns_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html Waterworth, J. 1848. The Council of Trent: The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent, London, Dolman.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

93

PECCATUM ORIGINALE – COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Resume:
There are considerable differencies related to understanding of the original sin in three major christian traditions: Eastern Orthodox, Romancatholic and Protestant. Eastern orthodox anthropology presumes that man did not lost ability of spiritual understanding after the fall, but Gods image (icon) still resides, although corrupted. Roman Catholic tradition insists that human nature is not totally corrupted although ability to do good is deeply weakened, but not completely lost. Although at first glance similar to the Orthodox, Roman Catholic anthropology differs significantly in terms of understanding human nature, mainly because of introduction of the concept donum superadditum. In contrast, prevailing Protestant view stands on pesimistic Augustiniane viewpoint of total depravity. Key words: original sin, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Sergej Beuk Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

95 UDK 22.08:230.11 Primljeno: 5.03.2010 Prihvañeno 10.5.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

OSNOVNE BIBLIJSKE VERE
U radu na temu povezanosti biblijske vere i æivota, autor pruæa moguñe odgovore na pitanja: ãta je religijska vera i koji su elementi biblijskog verskog koncepta? Promiãljajuñi o savremenosti kao o krizi verskog identiteta, rad nam donosi osnovne teoloãke premise hriãñanskog koncepta Boæije egzistencije u svetu kroz pojmove kao ãto su ’’opãta vera’’ i ’’dar vere’’, bez kojih nije moguñe prepoznati Boæiju prisutnost u i meœu ljudima. Takoœe, analizom teksta iz tradicionalnog reformisanog (kalvinistiåkog) dokumenta ’’Belgijskog veroispovedanja’’autor iznosi tezu da hristologija protestantsko – evanœeoskog tipa ima korene u teologiji Æana Kalvina i ostalih reformisanih mislilaca. Kljuåne reåi: Religija, Biblija, vera, Bog, Hristos, Sveti Duh, teologija darova, dar vere.

Uvod
Od kada postoji, ljudsko biñe stoji pred jednim od temeljnih pitanja egzistencije koje glasi: ko je Bog i ãta je religijska vera? Da li je to samo verovanje u natprirodno, nevidljivo i samodovoljno biñe ili se religijsko, kao specifiåno versko iskustvo, moæe konkretizovati? Zaãto postoje razliåiti religijski sistemi i da li svi svedoåe o istom fenomenu? Po åemu je Biblija drugaåija od drugih religijskih spisa?

96

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

U XIX, a naroåito u XX veku moæemo primetiti intelektualnu teænju za sintetizacijom (ili, bolje reñi, sinkretizacijom) razliåitih i åesto nespojivih religiskih sistema: od pojave teozofskog pokreta (kao formalne preteåe Nju Ejdæa), preko antropozofije, spiritizma i razliåitih tantriåkih kultova, pa do pokuãaja hinduizacije Zapada, kroz vaiãnizam – kriãnaizam, meditativne tehnike i jogu, razliåita panteistiåka i/ili pananteistiåka uåenja i intenzive prosvetljenja, savremeni åovek pokuãava da se izbavi iz krletke besmisla, alijenacije i smrti. Meœutim, da li smo posle svega na pragu odgovora? Da li smo sreñniji i bliæi istini? Da li je svet postao bolje mesto za æivot? Veñ dvadeset vekova Hristos poziva ljude na veru pokajanja i preumljenja; na promenu svesti srca i ljubav prema bliænjima reåima: ’’Evo stojim na vratima i kucam: ako ko åuje glas moj i otvori vrata, uñi ñu k njemu i veåerañu s njime, i on sa mnom.’’ (Otk. 3, 20) On åeka da mu otvorimo vrata i pozovemo na agape – gozbu, u sigurnosti iskrene i istinske biblijske vere.

Definicije religijske vere
Ako poœemo od najopãtije definicije da je religija ’’...odnos izmeœu nas i Biña izvan nas’’ (Everett, 2009: 10), onda religijska vera predstavlja specifiåan oblik poverenja/pouzdanja u Vrhovnu Realnost – u Boga ili bogove.1 U tom pravcu idu i sledeñe definicije religijske vere: ona je ’’...verovanje, razumevanje i oboæavanje Vrhovnog Uma i Volje koja usmerava Vaseljenu i odræava moralni odnos sa ljudima.’’ (Marlineau, 1888: 15). Moæemo primetiti da autor smatra da je religijska vera nemoguña bez kognitivnog i etiåkog aspekta, kojima se odgoneta Volja Tvorca i ostvaruje neraskidiv odnos sa tvorevinom. Ona je i voljno istraæivanje Istine,2 unutraãnji
1

Vidi: Schaff, Philip, New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1954.

2 Vidi: Hexham, Irving, Concise Dictionary of Religion, Regent College Press, Vancouver, 1999.

Stanton. uviœamo teãkoñu definisanja vere: ona.. 1851: 180). to je stav åije prihvatanje nije motivisano bilo kakvim unutrasnjim dokazom. ne zanemarujuñi istoriju religija. bez stvarnog uåeãña misaonog.4 Zakljuåujemo da religijska vera: ’’ . Vidi: Swatos. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society.. Na ovom mestu preneo bih misao Åarlsa Buka iz 1851.’’ (Nickoloff. oseñanja i fenomena – od afriåkog fetiãizma. sa drugim ljudima i celom planetom. Kathryn and Marlan.. definicija religijske vere. uviœamo koliko je naã zadatak teæak. Iako u mnogo åemu prevaziœena. Za autora je vera svedoåanstvo drugog u kome se ona iznenada otvara za nas.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 97 stav i posebno uverenje3 koje podrazumeva transpersonalni odnos åiji je izvor u Bogu. Vidi: Leeming. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. Springer. 2007: 445) I pored iznetog. William. trebalo da se uhvati u koãtac sa postmodernim shvatanjem Svetog. dok bi sa druge. s jedne strane. vec autoritetom ili svedoåenjem nekog drugog koji je otkriva ili se na nju poziva’’ (Buck. AltaMira Press.nalazi svoju istinitost u ultimativnoj stvarnosti. Espin.. preko lamaistiåkog budizma. Ako tu dodamo i savremene komunikoloãke standarde i medije. U ’’Enciklopoediji religije i druãtva’’ moæemo proåitati da je religijska vera sistem verovanja.obuhvata celokupan æivot koji je u odgovarajuñoj vezi sa Bogom. 5 . 2009. niti razliåite kontekstualizacijske religijske forme verovanja. istini koju ne sagledavamo sopstvenim razumom i iskustvom. godine. naroåito internet. predstavlja temelj za miãljenje mnogih da je religioznost a priori iracionalna i samo mistiåka delatnost duha. do islama. New York. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. pogotovu u smislu opãte sekularizacije kakva je danas na delu. Madden. Kniter i Madæets zakljuåuju da religijska vera:’’. Lanham. razvija odnos sa tom stvarnoãñu i 3 4 Vidi: Encyclopedia Britannica. koja veoma specifiåno opisuje problem definisanja religijske vere: ’’Vera je ona saglasnost koju dajemo neåijem predlogu. mora obuhvatiti razliåitost religijskih iskustava. bez posebnog zahteva za razumskim i kritiåkim delovanjem. prakse i kontinuiranog samoposmatranja koje se reflektuje na ponaãanje i stavove. 1998.. ovako izneta.5 dok Hil. 2007. David.

kao stalno aktuelan i aktivan princip.. Daniel. odnosto. Howard – Snyder. kojom se Bog otkriva. 1997: 3).98 Teoloãki åasopis. koji se otkrio ljudskom rodu svojom logosnom prirodom kroz Sveto pismo. druãtvu i istoriji. Knitter. .6 Iako neiscrpna kao tema. tako. time. dañemo i svoju definiciju religijske vere: ona je specifiåan oblik svesnosti koji podrazumeva veru u Boga. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. na æalost. Pateñi. kao Tvorca ljudi i Univerzuma. Definicije biblijske vere Biblijska vera je izraz koji se koristi za definisanje Svetopisamskog uåenja. zaobiñi ni problem slobodne volje koja nalazi svoje mesto u verskom. a ne delo ljudske mudrosti. Faith. Thomas. Bogonadahnuti tekst Biblije zapoåinje æivot u okviru civilizacije s jednom jasnom namerom – ocrtavanjem ljudskom rodu Boæijeg plana spasenja koje se ostvaruje verom: ’’U Novom zavetu vera. 1995: 34). u ovom trenutku.. Biblijski oblik religijske vere jeste spiritualna manifestacija Njegove Svevolje koja poseduje dve komponente: veru u Boga i veru u Njegovu Reå.veñ ono ãto Bog o sebi objavljuje’’ (Lewis. Biblija. a posebno onih koje iznose Isus Hristos i Njegovi apostoli. po sebi. je predstavljena kao dar Svetog Duha. religijska vera je neophodni i poåetni åinilac razumevanja fenomena religijskog (Svetog) u åoveku. apsolutni Kreator neba i zemlje i Odræavalac kreacije. obznanjuje i poziva: ’’Ne sme biti zaboravljeno da je za bibijsku veru krucijalno ne ono ãto o Bogu åovek govori. Jeff. Gospod je. Ne smemo. postaje Boæija jedinstvena objava. ãto podvlaåe Flinova i Tomasova: ’’ Religijska vera je jedinstven izbor verovanja u Boga i æivljenja u odnosu sa Njim’’ (Flynn. Madges. od uopãtavanja. Lanham. plod izabranja i posebnog 6 Vidi: Jordan. Takav Bog – milosrdan i svemoguñ – jeste poåetna taåka u razumevanju religijske vere Starog i Novog zaveta. 1996. N° 9 pokreñe ljude da prihvate naåin æivota koji proishodi iz takvog odnosa’’ (Hill. 1953: 113). vera podrazumeva slobodu miãljenja i izbor æivotnog stava. Freedom and Rationality.

Ona je potpuno poverenje u . veñ primarno Boæiji neposredovani akt u bogotragaocu koji je spreman za primanje takvog milosrdnog poklona. usinovljenju. jesu elementi doktrinarne vere bez kojih hriãñanstvo uopãte ne bi bilo moguñe (Jd. Jasno je da bez izraæene emotivistiåke crte. ali da li je to dovoljno? Grudem i Parsvel odgovaraju: ’’Prava spasavajuña vera ukljuåuje znanje. Opravdavajuña vera poåiva na uverenju da je Bog pravedan. Biblijska vera.. koje se sastoji od pouzdanja. 15. Ona je uvek individualno fokusirana na Svetog Sina i Njegovo Boæansko delo na zemlji (Dl. opravdavajuña vera. ali i da je vernik opravdan pred Njim i Njegovom svetom voljom.vera je vrsta miãljenja. 5. Vrste biblijske vere Iako postoji mnogo razliåitih podela. 4. Spasavajuña vera usmerena je na iskupljujuñu ærtvu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda i Spasitelja. Purswell. znanja i razumevanja’’ (Hodgson. Pravednost Boæija se odnosi na sve izabrane vernike i ne zavisi od ljudskih æelja ili htenja (Post. dnevna vera i 6 dar vere. Posredniåka vera podrazumeva sposobnost razumevanja Boæanskog delovanja u nama. doktrinarna vera. podrazumeva shvatanje poruke Pisma. spasavajuña vera. 2001: 19). Kao ãto moæemo razumeti. kako vidimo. odobravanje i liåno poverenje’’ (Grudem. mi ñemo se u tekstu ograniåiti na osnovne vrste vere koje moæemo nañi u Svetom pismu: 1. 29). spasenju..3). 1979: 1). 6). posredniåka vera. Istine o Svetoj Trojici. kojeg ne moæe biti bez jasnog sagledavanja Njegove volje kroz Reå i zato Hodæson naglaãava: ’’. 1. vera nije moguña i da znanje mora pratiti odreœeno oseñanje. 1. posveñenja i ljubavi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 99 otkrivenja koje ljudsko srce nije samo osmislilo’’ (Berkhof. Ona je i poåetak biblijski usmerenog æivota. 2. crkvi i sl. biblijska vera nije samo postignuñe ljudskog biña koje traga za Bogom. 3. 1999: 307). Doktrinarna ili opãta vera se odnosi na osnovna uåenja Svetog pisma i predstavlja polaziãte svih daljih versko – teoloãkih razmatranja. potvrda Boæije promisli i naåin soterioloãkog ostvarivanja.

greatbiblestudy. mi otkrivamo sve ãto je Bog o sebi dozvolio da se spozna. 7 Vidi: http://www. 11. milost i ærtvu nije moguñe razumeti biblijski oblik vere. veñ i za ãirenje same crkve kroz evangelizaciju i misiologiju (Jev.com/biblical_faith. kroz Logos – Sina. Bez pouzdanja u Njegovu promisao. Dar vere moæemo razumeti samo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. ãto znaåi da je to jedan od osnovnih darova koje Bog daje crkvi na proslavljenje. kroz ceo æivot i u svakom trenutku (Jev. ali i to biñe odgovara liånom verom svom Tvorcu. On je. tako da mu se liånost u potpunosti predaje u poverenju i ljubavi (Gal. 10. 23). otkrio Sebe svetu. 11). dopustivãi mu da se obrati i iskupi (Rim. kao izvora Pravde. kao i zakljuåci koje moæemo izvesti7: 1. 2. dovodi nas do Boga. Vera u Boga utvrœuje pouzdanje Vera je uvek odnos – od Boga. 7). ãto je krucijalno. 10. Jasno je da biblijska vera sadræi dva elementarna principa: a) veru u Njegovu volju i b) veru u Njegova obeñanja.100 Teoloãki åasopis. Ta vera je jasna. kroz Reå. Iako Boæija suãtina ostaje skrivena. 20). Ona obuhvata svakodnevno usmerenje na razvijanje nove hristocentriåne svesti koja nam ukazuje na dnevnu Boæiju prisutnost (II Kor. ka ljudskom biñu. stalna pouzdanost u Boæiju prisutnost i voœstvo. Znanje o Bogu utvrœuje veru Naãa spoznaja Istine. ne samo za pojedince koji svedoåe o svom daru. Dnevna vera ukazuje na neophodnost permanentnog verovanja u Boga i Njegovu Silu.php . N° 9 izbavljajuñu snagu Gospoda. Prouåavajuñi Sveto pismo. iz kojih proishode svi ostali elementi vere i potpunog poverenja. 5. 2. 1 – 3).

dok kroz odnos sa bliænjima pokazujemo pozitivan stav prema celokupnoj tvorevini. i nada. i æivot.. ali i odgovornoãñu koja svaka sluæba u crkvi sa sobom nosi. Pouzdanje u Boga utvrœuje ljubav Sveto pismo na mnogo mesta ponavlja da vera pokazuje svoj efekat samo ako je bazirana na ljubavi. ali je svuda prisutan. sve zna. u celini moæemo nazvati ’’darovima sluæbe’’ ili joã preciznije ’’darovima sluæenja’’ svima kojima je to sluæenje potrebno. Bog je pun ljubavi prema svim ljudima i svima stvorenjima’’ (Episkop Danilo. Stot daje opãtu definiciju darova Duha: ’’Duhovni darovi su odreœeni kapaciteti dodeljeni po blagodati Boæijoj i kroz Njegovu snagu. o svemu brine. nije samo oseñanje. ali i velika misterija pred svakim biñem koje teæi odgonetanju osnovnih istina æivota i smrti: ’’Prava vera je vera u jednoga Boga u Trojici. Bog je Biñe bez poåetka i bez kraja. ãto znaåi da Duhovne darove. Ta se ljubav uvek odnosi na Boga i Isusa Hrista. 1976: 132). ona je i poverenje. episkop Amfilohije. koji je usklaœen sa tipom liånosti.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 101 3.. vaæno. ãto je.’’ (Snyder. Dar vere Ako pokuãamo da versko odgonetnemo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. On je Duh koji se ne vidi. primarno. Tvorca neba i zemlje i svega vidljivog i nevidljivog. 1996: 3). i izabrani) i . automatski. åak. ne ni za liåni duhovni razvoj. Snajder se nadovezuje: ’’Duhovni darovi su dati ne samo za liåno uæivanje. Iz svega iznetog uviœamo teãkoñu precizne analize vrsta biblijske vere. 13). a koji odgovaraju odreœenim ljudima i njihovim sluæbama’’ (Stott. onda je upravo dar vere jedan od osnovnih aktualizacija Treñeg Lica Trojice u biñu verujuñih. po Pismu. sve vidi. iz åega sledi da svi verujuñi mogu biti nosioci darova (åime ne postaju. i ljubav. 1964: 87). sve moæe. Ljubav. veñ zbog opãteg dobra. Flin potvrœuje: ’’Dar bih opisao kao posebnu kvalifikaciju odobrenu od strane [Svetog] Duha svakom verniku za osposobljavanje sluæenja u okviru Tela Hristovog’’ (Flynn. Autor koristi termin ’’kapaciteti’’ da bi naglasio pouzdanost i volumen odreœenog dara. naravno. 1974: 20). veñ naåin egzistencije iz svesti novog duha i oåiãñenog srca (I Kor.

102 Teoloãki åasopis. Navedeni aspekt se pojavljuje samo u situacijama kada postoji konkretna pretnja po zajednicu i on je neophodan element svih sluæbi u crkvi. Pored mnogih faktora po kojima se Dar prepoznaje. vizionarski i interventni. niti bi takav dar bio platforma za razumevanje ostalih darova Svetog Duha. . b) pouzdanost i c) izvesnost. N° 9 svi mogu doprinositi razvoju crkve. kao instrumentalizacije Boæije promisli8: hriãñansku ili opãtu veru moæemo razumeti kao izraz Boæije ljubavi i prisutnosti u æivotu ljudi. okrenut ka unutra – ka pojedincu sa posebnom idejom i doæivljajem i neophodan je. naveli bismo samo tri: a) usmerenost. dar vere moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu sposobnost åiji je izvor u Svetom Duhu i sluæi samoizgradnji verujuñih. molitve. Ako bismo svoju paænju okrenuli ka daru vere. Interventni aspekt podrazumeva specifiåan oblik uvida i snage da se preduprede ili suzbiju krize u crkvi. moæemo posmatrati i kroz tri aspekta. dok je dar vere specifiåan. socijalno – eklisijalnom planu. kako za pastoralnu. Nottingham. koristeñi svaki resurs radi ostvarivanja odreœenog plana. joã na poåetku moramo napraviti jasnu distinkciju izmeœu hriãñanske vere. Harold. ka prisutnim vernicima i podrazumeva se u pastoralnoj sluæbi. rastu i utvrœivanju crkve i evangelizaciji sveta. Instrumentalni aspekt dara vere odnosi se. tako i za dijakonijsku sluæbu. The Gifts of the Spirit. takoœe. i dara vere. a elementi su: Biblija. propoved. po sebi. Uzimajuñi reåeno u obzir. prvenstveno. Navedeni aspekt dara Duha uvek je okrenut ka spolja – ka zajednici. Assembly of God Publishing House. ali i baziåan dar Svetog Duha koji deluje na opãtem. Dar vere. Dar vere. koji su jednako vaæni. Vizionarski aspekt usmeren je na osobe koje imaju moguñnost da sagledaju buduñe potrebe crkve. a koje moæemo oznaåiti kao instrumentalni. na veru kao instrument sluæenja. 1934. dar vere ne bi bio prepoznat ni blagosloven. slavljenje i sl. 8 Vidi: Horton. Vizionarski aspekt je intristiåan. Moæemo zakljuåiti da su darovi Svetog Duha kompleks razliåitih sposobnosti koji sluæe razvoju crkve i svih njenih vernika. Bez njih.

te da ne traæi niãta ãto je izvan Njega. naãu pravednost. 2008. Ali. Kada ta 9 Za viãe informacija vidi Predgovor dr Jasmina Miliña u ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. veñ je ona samo sredstvo kojim prigrljujemo Hrista. Zato. Tordinci. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. koja za cilj ima stvaranje spiritualnih potencija za razvoj naroda Boæijeg. Chuck. ne mislimo da je samo vera ta koja nas opravdava. Dakle. veñ da je i neãto drugo potrebno za spasenje je najveñe bogohuljenje. reñi da Hristos nije dovoljan. moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu intervenciju u sistemu Boæijeg plana. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. neizostavno sledi – ili u Hristu ne nalazimo sve ãto nam je potrebno za spasenje ili je sve potrebno u Njemu. poãteno govoreñi. s pravom. Tordinci.) Doktrinarni dokument ’’Belgijsko veroispovedanje’’ predstavlja najstariji i najznaåajniji izraz teoloãke misli Reformisanih crkava Evrope i sveta. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. U sluåaju poslednjeg.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 103 tako. A Isus Hristos je naãa pravednost. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. jer bi to znaåilo da je Isus Hrist samo napola Spasitelj. 2008. 10 . Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. u potpunosti je spasen. 28). a vera je sredstvo koje nas dræi u zajednici s Njim i svim Njegovim dobroåinstvima. i Baynard. 2008. onaj koji ima Hrista po veri. Stoga. Prevedeno i prireœeno prema: ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. Pravednost vere u ’’Confessio Belgica’’ (1561. ålanu koji nosi naslov ’’Pravednost vere’’ moæemo proåitati10: ’’Verujemo kako na sledeñi naåin spoznajemo ove velike tajne: Sveti Duh nam u srcu pali plamen istinske vere koja prihvata Isusa Hrista sa svim Njegovim zaslugama. Chuck Baynard. åineñi da naãe srce postaje Njegovo. moæemo reñi da smo opravdani samo ’verom’ ili verom ’bez vrãenja Zakona’ (Rim. 3.9 U svom 22. jer nam prepuãta sve zasluge i sva sveta dela koja je uåinio za nas i umesto nas. s Pavlom.

ili nije i tu ne moæe biti sredine! Tako. Vera je pozvanost i povezanost. i svaka sumnja u tu istinu iskljuåuje nas iz kruga izabranih. Istaknimo joã neãto: sve tradicionalne protestantske i evanœeoske crkve prate izneti teoloãki credo. naglaãavajuñi hristocentriåno versko usmerenje. Zato.. a moæda. tako da slobodno moæemo govoriti o korenima razumevanja uloge i znaåaja Isusa Hrista upravo kroz dela Æana Kalvina i dokumente reformisanih/prezviterijanskih crkava. ali tako ãto prihvatamo i uranjamo u Hrista. a svoje svedoåanstvo nalazi kroz dobroåinstvo.104 Teoloãki åasopis. ona su viãe nego dovoljna da nas razreãe naãeg greha. poverenje u ljubav koju gaji Otac prema svojoj deci. Zakljuåak Nezahvalno je iznositi zakljuåak na temu biblijske vere. Hristos nas je pozvao da ga sledimo i tome ne moæemo niãta dodati. ali moæemo se i prepustiti reåima apostola Pavla: ’’Vera je. Posredstvom Svetog Duha. Ta izvesnost je konkretna. vera je sredstvo koje nas odræava u zajednici sa Gospodom. niti oduzeti – On je put. ali i tek zapoået. iznad svega. a vera u Njega putovanje do u izvesnost spasenja. Dakle. åime soterioloãki put biva osiguran. pali se æar predanosti åiji je nedvosmislen izraz vera u Mesiju kao Spasitelja ljudi. Vera u iskupiteljsku ærtvu na krstu dovoljna je za veåni æivot. tvrdo åekanje onog åemu se nadamo. i dokazivanje onog ãto ne vidimo. Hristos ili jeste. 11. a po volji Svetog Oca.. pravednost i ljubav. istrajnost i trpeljivost. verom. ’’ .’’ Jasno je da reformisana (kalvinistiåka) teologija svoje korene vidi iskljuåivo u Pismu koje potvrœuje nebesku ulogu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda. pak. ona zauzima sve mentalne kapacitete i podrazumeva ceo æivot – od svakodnevnih misli i odluka. Moæemo napisati tomove knjiga o biblijskoj veri. 1). N° 9 dobroåinstva postanu naãa. (Jev. zatvorimo oåi i zakoraåimo. do potpune predanosti Bogu. æiva realnost koju je moguñe ostvariti i koja se dostiæe u srcu i umu bogotraæitelja. postajemo opravdani verom.

Grand Rapids. Key words: Religion. gift of faith. 2008. Hendrikus. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. Chuck. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Bible. CITIRANA DELA: Baynard. Berkhof. which basis is connection between biblical faith and life. theology of gifts.. by analyzing the text from the traditional reformed (Calvinist) document ’’Belgian confession’’ author introduces the thesis that Christology of protestant-evangelical type has roots in the theology of Jean Calvin and other reformed thinkers. belief. Holy Spirit. Chuck Baynard. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje. the work brings us the basic premise of the Christian theological concept of Gods existence in the world through terms such as ’’general faith’’ and the ’’gift of faith’’. God. Christian Faith. . Christ. Wm. without which it is not possible to recognize Gods presence in and among people. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. Tordinci. Also. 2008.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 105 Summary In this paper. 1979. author is providing possible answers on the following questions: what is religious faith and which are the elements of biblical belief concept? Considering actuality as a form of crisis of religious identity.

106 Teoloãki åasopis. Living Faith. Louisville. Eileen. Wheaton. 19 Gifts of the Spirit. Crissy & Markley. Episkop Danilo. 1996. 1974. Vanc couver. Paul and Madges. William. The psychological elements of religious faith. Grudem. Purswell. 1997. Westminster John Knox Press. Regent College Press. Flynn. Faith. Victor Books. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. . 1995. Charleston. N° 9 Buck. 2009. Hexham. Lanham. Everett. Twenty – Third Publications. Wayne. Religion and Theology. A Theological Dictionary. Srpska pravoslavna Eparhija sremska. 1999. Charles. Gloria. Charles. Leslie. episkop Amfilohije. Biblio Life. Irving. Knitter. Flynn. 1851. Thomas. Peter. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 2001. Hill. Zondervan. Mystic. Bible Doctrine. Nema lepãe vere od hriãñanske. 1999. Carroll. Philadelphia. Encyclopedia Britannica. Hodgson. Jeff. Sremski Karlovci. Brennan. Grand Rapids. Christian Faith. Concise Dictionary of Religion. 2007.

Grand Rapids. Inter – Varsity Press. Nickoloff. Harold. 2007. Swatos. Westminster Press.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 107 Horton. Liturgical Press. Baptism and Fullness. Madden. Edwin. New York. Howard. Philip. Baker Book House. John. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. James. AltaMira Press. Lewis. An Introductory Dictionary of Theology and Religious Studies. Lanham. 1954. The Biblical Faith and Christian Freedom. New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge. James. Downers Grove. William. 1934. 1964. 2009. London. Nottingham. Snyder. 1953. Orlando. izdavaå nepoznat. Springer. Stanton. Collegeville. Stott. 1976. The Gifts of the Spirit. The Problem of Wine Skins. Downers Grove. Philadelphia. A Study of Religion. David. Kathryn and Marlan. Marlineau. 1998. Schaff. Assembly of God Publishing House. Espin. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. 1888. Leeming. Inter – Varsity Press. .

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet By Csongor –Szabolcs Bene 109 UDK 211:215 Primljeno: 01. rather by focusing on a biblical theological understanding of the identity of God. revelation. to a certain degree. The main argument is that theology is in essence God talk and specifically talk about the identity of God in contrast to religious studies where God is talked about in terms of a human projection.2010 Originalni nauåni rad Speaking of God Key words: theology. the identity of God.2010 Prihvañeno: 05. I was faced with the challenge to rethink and to reevaluate the theological assumptions that I had become accustomed to and that I had. God talk when compared to the demands of modern scientific theory it seems that it is impossible. God talk. a popular approach to religious studies today. philosophy of science. biblical theology. theology is not only possible as God talk but also justified.04. Under the Line It was during my studies that I first became acquainted with what is known as ‘the religious scientific critique of God and theology’. religious studies. But we see this as no reason to abandon theology as God talk. The confrontation with this critical approach to theology eventually culminated in an intellectual and personal crisis. In this article the author explores the differences between theology and religious studies by focusing on the theology of God.04. . theology of God. rationality. taken for granted. The crisis is best described in terms of a challenge.

at the bottom of the board. The line on the white board indicated the divide between the natural and the supernatural. From an objective and uninvolved perspective all religious experiences seem quite similar. In the scientific community the researcher of religion must take the position of methodical atheism. a couple of matchstick figures were drawn. in philosophical terms the physical and the metaphysical. This ultimately means that all that there is above the line is out of reach. above the line the word God was posited. from the respective religion. points only in one direction. Islam. which indicates the dynamics of the religious experience. which guarantees scientific objectivity. The third assumption has to do with what is above the line: God. These indicated that all religions have a certain ‘holy book’ that contains their teachings. The arrow. God exists as an undefined. Above these figures. The ul- . books were drawn. On a fundamental level this means that the line cannot be crossed either way.110 Teoloãki åasopis. on a second row. The one engaged in the study of religions must not be biased by any of the religions under consideration. they all have a holy book. closest to the all-dividing line between humanity and God. unidentified and. The drawing is based on certain assumptions about the reality of the religious experience and the consequent scientific analysis of it. The second assumption is related to the first: because religion is objectively analyzed. since its analysis is objective. as the one who provides access to God. an exceptional figure and a God. Above the line. N° 9 The argumentation in class went like this: on a white-board. The fourth assumption is that the religious experience is a one-sided affair. The matchstick figures symbolized the major religions in the world today: Christianity. Buddhism and Hinduism. The first assumption is that this image of religions today is the most scientifically responsible. the name was written of a key figure. the scientific approach presupposes certain similarities between human religious experiences. by consequence unhistorical entity. Above the books. and humans of all that is physical. after all. God was thus part of all that is metaphysical. God is posited above the all-dividing line between the physical and the metaphysical. Judaism. a line was drawn. under the line. All that there is under the line is what matters. from bottom up.

all-knowing. which stands for ‘a being up there’. from a religious-scientific (Religionswissenschaftlich) perspective. What I am about to challenge in this article is the religious scientific approach to theology specifically its ‘generic conception of God’ in terms of ‘the highest divine being’. can be identified. So God is well identified through the stories told by his people through the ages. It is a God with no history. Since human consciousness is bound to all that is under the line. no people and no places.e. In the face of this criticism I. I am challenged to consider the possibility of theology as talk about God. God is not just a general concept. God is . God has acted at given times and in certain places to a specific group of people. I was familiar with the fact that theologians talk about God as a well-identified entity. taking into account the above criticism. faceless. God is a generic term. It is no longer a talk about God as such. has a history. This implies the obvious conclusion: God is not an entity on its own but just another faculty of the human imagination. It is evident that from a Christian theological perspective there are some problems with the above-mentioned critical approach. and on the other well described by abstract definitions like all-powerful. but has a Name. can be called upon and thus. In post-Kantian terminology. which is at the heart of the modern criticism of theology as a discipline.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 111 timate assumption is that the Divine is not an entity on its own. in terms of divinity. mute being who is decorated with superlatives. everything beyond that line is a projection and in the final analysis non-existent. The reason is that. have been asking the following question: what about the identity of God? From a Christian theological perspective. The heart of the problem is that a nonspecific conception of God. As a Christian theologian. i. God is a projection of the human mind. But ultimately this God has its home in the human consciousness and ability to project a superior higher being. In history. This is precisely the underlying principle. theology. God is defined as a distant. but talk of the religious feelings of human beings. as a theologian. ever-present etc. but it is intrinsically bound to the projections of the human mind. does not do justice to the Christian theological talk of God. The irony is that this divine being is on the one hand unidentified.

consequently the identity of God. it is wise to first look at some well-known definitions by representative theologians through the various ages of Christian theology. translated with an introduction and philosophical commentary by M. Anselm of Canterbury’s classic formulation. meeting people. to a certain 1 St. By making explicit what I understand theology to be. Anselm. wisdom sayings and testimonies document Gods history with these people.112 Teoloãki åasopis. songs. Definitions often carry within them the unspoken presuppositions which lie at the heart of one’s theological work. 1965). Theology then is a process of rationalization of the believer’s faith experiences. N° 9 talked about in terms of appearing. fides quaerens intellectum. laws. We will present our definition of theology alongside these definitions. (Oxford: Clarendon Press. God has an identity. . It is a classic definition. as a way of showing our specific take on the matter. speaking to them and acting in their lives. which is still popular and much appreciated by theologians. Here the identity of God has to do with a biblical theological understanding of who God is and how that understanding helps us to address the problems of a religious-scientific approach to theology in general and to the theology of God. The consequent stories. will also become more evident. What is Theology? Beyond a personal motivation lies also a certain understanding of what the discipline of theology is. According to the anselmian formula. Proslogion: with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. “faith seeking understanding”1 is one of the most well known definitions of theology. It is this theological understanding of God that does not match the modern scientific perspective of the divine. theology is a discipline by which the believers seek to express their beliefs in a reasonable and ordered way. These experiences are related to a certain tradition. In order to understand what Christian theology is. Charlesworth.J.

3 In modernity..Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 113 community and to the individual person. Rationality. mainly on talking about God’s being in light of the challenges presented by the critics of the Christian faith. 3 See. and by consequence. In the Middle Ages a certain shift took place in the way theology was understood. are all important aspects in one’s definition of what the discipline of theology entails.2 and also elucidated the content of faith with regard to beliefs that were contrary to the Credo.F. . which ought to be taught in an academic setting? If theology is strictly related to the Church. Theology during this early period was fully a church discipline that belonged to the community of faith.” in NDT. Most theological works were dealing with the problems related Christology. Theology was a multifaceted discipline that gave a rational synthesis of the Church’s Credos. then what defines its content and aims and what is its relevance to the life of the Church? Thus far. a subject taught in the academia. This faith was hallmarked by the scandalous claim that God had become a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. “Theology. With the emergence of scholasticism came also the uprooting of theology as a Church discipline. one could talk about a separate development in modernity. as it were. Wright. the character of theology has been mostly shaped by its position within the gap between church and university. The early church fathers focused. Questions are often raised as one inquires about modern theology: is theology a discipline restricted to the life of the Church or is it a public discipline (meaning apart from the Church). with a strict demarcation be2 By Credo we mean the theological and confessional achievements of the various Councils of the Church roughly before 400 AD. and specifically with the God-human relationship. Theology moved. in their theology. faith. from the Church into the university. experience. then what is its public relevance? If theology is a matter of public interest. a scientific discipline. 680. D. This break is significant for the way theology is understood today. community and talk. Theology became more of a system of thought.

. 5.. between us and Him. they also have to deal with the relevance of academic theology for the life and practice of the Church. whether to humankind as message or to God in praise and petition – for of course the church speaks the gospel also to God. 4 5 e Grenz. in a language. The definitions of the modern period are marked by the struggle to precisely define theology as a discipline. Christian Theology. theologians try to show the relevance of theology for public matters.W. systematic theology is the reflection on and the ordered articulation of faith. Systematic Theology. 2 Ed. 7 McGrath. J. vol. (Oxford: Blackwell.E. which God in Jesus Christ has established. 2000). 1997). Christelijk Geloof. 32.114 Teoloãki åasopis. while on the other hand. The following classic definitions are reminiscent of this very ambiguity. Theology for the Community of God. 1. “Theology: is the systematic reflection on the content of the relationship.. 1997). On the one hand.”5 “…theology is the thinking internal task of speaking the gospel. R. Modern theologians often seek to bridge this gap.. with signs other than linguistic – in the church called “sacrament” and “sacrifice” – or by other behavior of our community.”7 Berkhof. The Triune God. 141. 8 druk (Kampen: Kok. (Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1. H. S. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. How shall we get it across. A. N° 9 tween church theology and academic theology. that Jesus is risen and what that means?”6 “Theology is reflection upon God whom Christians worship and adore.. pleading it before him and praising him for it. The church’s specific enterprise of thought is devoted to the question. 6 Jenson. An Introduction. 2002). nd .”4 “Basically.

New Edition. In short.e. theology is understood and defined as an intellectual discipline. i. but also about God himself. i. is God Himself in his dealings with the world and the ensuing good message of His works. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. theology happens in relationship with a faith community. The theologian’s task is to reflect on and to speak about the content of faith.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 115 “Now the matter. the Church.”9 Beyond the ambiguity of these definitions. (Nijkerk: Callenbach.e. It may be in the church. Van de Beek. is critical and systematic reflection of the presupposition of the Church’s ministry of witness. Theology in other words is talk about God. God kennen – met God leven. God. Third. for it finds its roots and ends in her. K. Theology is ultimately related to the church in an essential way. 10 The word theology is the convergence the two Greek words ‘theos’. theology. there are some common features that unite them: first.word of or about God. in community with others. However it is not only about the human ideas about God or the human religious feelings of human beings.. A. To talk about God does 8 9 Barth. But the context in which theological reflection and speaking happens may vary. This is not a mere translation of the Greek rendering of theos – logos. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982.God and ‘logos’ . Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. theology is broadly defined in modernity as a discipline.10 rather. (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans.”8 “…Theology is about the knowledge of God. and. Second. 2002). it is the classic understanding of what the exercise of theological work entails. by implication. in the academy or in the public square. related in its aims and tasks to the theologian who reflects on the content of his faith.. The basic premise of our definition is that the task of theology is to talk about God. the content of faith. The ancient Greek philosophers used this . 2. 1982). the content of theology.

the most fundamental question the theologian had to answer was an epistemological question. a discourse in verbal and nonverbal forms. Later. N° 9 not only refer to the act of utterance itself. This critical note implies that theology is more than just talk about God. On a fundamental level.e.116 Teoloãki åasopis. It implies a certain way of talking about God. Here we focus on this one aspect of theology. i. the Church through the ages. and can also be addressed. because in a certain sense. about whom we as theologians talk? Initially the answer to the question might seem obvious. In the standard post-enlightenment theologies. This is not only an individualistic endeavor. theology is also talk about the world and humanity. The identity of God also implies that God is identified by a Name. This can be traced to the all-defining question of the Enlightenment: how do you know what you know? Most modern theologians struggled to definition for all teachings about metaphysics. namely talk about God. It is right. To talk about God is to talk about the identity of God. but the contrary is true. To talk about God and the identity of God is to talk about the God who is identified in and through the Biblical narratives.e. To talk about the identity of God is to talk about a God who is identified by specific events in time and space. The above definition of theology might be considered a narrow representation of what the task of theology might entail in its totality. our question about the identity of God is a departure from the kind of theological prolegomena developed during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. . To formulate this in a question: who is this God. but also a communal act that takes place in the context of a certain faith community. Therefore the understanding that theology is talk about God is central and directive here. in Christian thinking. God is not a general term for some abstract ‘high being’. The identity of God implies the actual presence of God in history. Theology is an articulated exteriorization of the theologian’s experiences related to God. it became related specifically to the sum of the teachings about God in the Christian tradition. but also to the broader meaning of what talk means. i.

To ask the question who is God? is to ask about the identity of God.J. Epistemological Criticism of Theology At the tail-end of the twentieth century the general feel in the field of theology was that the talk of God was not only problematic but also impossible. What essentially happened was that the epistemological question became the fundamental question for theology. Adriaanse. Part of understanding the problem of modern theology is to define as clearly as possible what the problem actually is. In a way this is a different starting point than that of the classic post-Enlightenment prolegomena marked by epistemology. To avoid the risk of entering into a meta discussion of the subject. in theology. to replace the epistemological question how do you know? with the question who is God? Is it fundamentally possible to ask a different question and receive a different answer? In actuality this is a turn from an epistemological towards a theological foundation and understanding of theology. Our critical observation considering this shift is this: the kind of question one asks influences the kind of answer one receives.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 117 justify their theologies concerning this very question. . we have identified the work of the Dutch theologian H. Ethics and Encyclopedia of Theology at the University of Leiden. Thus Adriaanse’s 11 He has been the professor of Philosophy of Religion.11 His over-all work is an outstanding exposition concerning the problems of twentieth century theology. The question we want to ask here is this: is it possible. from 1979 until his retirement in 2001. Theology in the post-enlightenment era was no longer about God as such but much more about whether or not it is possible for humans to understand anything about God.

We will approach Adriaanse’s argument from three different perspectives: historical. N° 9 work provides the vocabulary and the conceptual framework for our analysis of modern theology.118 Teoloãki åasopis. Popper. 13 K. The historical overview provides us with a broader perspective on the issues Adriaanse raises and also clearly defines his position in the field. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Conjectures is the guide by which 12 For clarity’ sake.R. Modern: in the sense that it deals with the core of Enlightenment ideology. The order of knowledge is subject to historical processes. 1963). (London: Routledge. Karl Popper’s Conjectures and Refutations 13 is an excellent introduction to the history of the philosophy of science.12 The Established Order of Knowing One of Adriaanse’s main arguments is that there is a certain order by which it can be established how and what one knows. Conjectures and Refutations. rather we use it to refer to the theological era which spans from the beginning of the eighteenth century up to the end of the twentieth century. formal and systematic. He is frequently compared with Kant. knowledge and rationality. the word modern in this context is not used in the sense of contemporary or today. and is seen by some as the bearer in . Therefore it is important to shortly trace these developments. See O’Hear’s assessment of Poppers importance in the field of the philosophy of science: “Large claims are made for Popper by his admirers. The work of Adriaanse is intrinsically connected to the developments of the philosophy of science in general. From a systematic perspective we will see Adriaanse’s definition of what constitutes a valid theory of knowledge in its relationship to modern scientific method. What today is accepted as valid knowledge can be traced in the history of philosophy of science. After the historical considerations we will look at some of the formal aspects of the established order of knowing. In it we will be able to formally analyze Adriaanse’s conception of experience.

As falsifying our theories is the one thing we can do effectively in science. and see if they survive. and abandoning any futile at verification or justification.14 Throughout history.” “Popper’s philosophy of science involves putting falsification center stage. and the shape of theology in the twentieth century. that is what we should do: test our theories empirically against the predications which follow from them. In it we find a certain correlation between. the Middle Ages and the Enlightenment. O’Hear (ed. in Conjectures. Modern theology is mainly characterized by the influence of Enlightenment rationality. (London: Routledge. . on the whole and that theology has struggled to define itself in accorthe twentieth century of the Kanitan torch. 2004). Adriaanse often notes that changes in scientific theory have had great influence on theology.) Karl Popper. After that he continues with the eighteenth century Enlightenment and the impact Kant had on the philosophy of science. we should abandon them. and devise a new theory to account for the data – and it is worth underlining here that Popper sees the forming of theories as a matter of imaginative conjecture. Popper’s treatment of Kant offers us keen insights into the shape of the scientific theory during the eighteenth century. he is a believer in reason and in the power of reason to solve our problems. If they do not. Kant’s Critique.” His main contribution has been to the philosophy of science. and its ensuing age of rationalism. Not only what constitutes knowledge has gone through changes. traces the history and development of the theory of science from an epistemological perspective. but also the method of acquiring knowledge. “Popper’s philosophy of science is marked by a deep hostility to any profession of certainty or attempt to claim justification for one’s theories. 14 Popper. Popper presents the fifteenth and sixteenth century tendencies through the juxtaposition of two representative philosophers: Bacon and Descartes. as a discipline. vol. meaning: how do we know what we know? has gone through a series of changes.” A. what was considered science.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 119 we trace the main tendencies of two major periods in the philosophy of science. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. 3-6.1. that is. Both the content and the method of knowledge are of interest here.

By following and contrasting these two. episteme. if not it may be uncovered by human beings. by the most optimistic view of man’s power to discern truth and to acquire knowledge”. . the truthfulness of Nature. Adriaanse’s work is part of this wider framework and his critique of classic theology is embedded in this kind of rationalism. Popper leads us to the fundamental understanding of modern theories of science. Bacon’s doctrine “might be described as the doctrine of the veritas Naturae. False method. “Descartes based his optimistic epistemology on the important theory of the veritas Dei. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is the intellectual intuition of clear and distinct ideas. which leads to doxa. Only if his mind is poisoned by prejudice can he fall into error”. Nature is an open book. Conjectures and Refutations. or prejudice. or conjecture or hypothesis. or superstition. This very thought contributed to the birth of modern science.15 At the heart of this optimism is the presupposition that truth is manifest. Conjectures and Refutations. on the other hand. He who reads it with a pure mind cannot misread it. The first stream of thought is classical empiricism (Bacon). True method is none other than the true reading or interpretation of Nature that leads to true knowledge. is the anticipation of the mind. for otherwise God would be deceiving us. The second stream is classical rationalism (Descartes). What we clearly and distinctly see to be true must indeed be true.120 Teoloãki åasopis. The Reformation and Renaissance in the fifteenth and sixteenth century brought about a certain “epistemological optimism. 7. 5.16 Bacon further distinguishes between true and false Method. Thus the truthfulness of God must make truth mani- 15 16 Popper. Popper follows two streams in the development of the English and the European theories of knowledge and science. in other words it may reveal itself. Popper. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is observation. N° 9 dance with the ever-developing findings of science.

Thus we are split into a human part.17. Popper critically concludes: “We can see more clearly why this epistemology. Conjectures and Refutations. However. Popper elsewhere points out that this is none other than Kant’s principle of autonomy. we ourselves. the part which is the source of real knowledge (episteme). remains essentially a religious doctrine in which the source of knowledge is divine authority”. But in doing so they split man into two parts…. but it seems like the efforts of both Bacon and Descartes are an attack on prejudice and naiveté. of our errors and of our ignorance. as divine authorities. anti-authoritarianism. . 17 18 19 20 Popper. Popper. and they set them up within each individual man. in Popper’s opinion. 15.e. Conjectures and Refutations. Popper. Popper’s critical analysis shows that “Descartes’ method of systematic doubt is also fundamentally the same (as that of Bacon): it is a method of destroying all false prejudices of the mind. and a super-human part. Most historians of philosophy agree that humanity has gone from the ‘darkness’ of the Middle Ages to the ‘light’ of the Enlightenment and Modernity. in order to arrive at the unshakable basis of self-evident truth”.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 121 fest”. such as the senses or the intellect. Popper raises the critical question of whether they truly managed to rid themselves of their dependency on authority for their optimistic epistemologies. Conjectures and Refutations. and which has an almost divine authority over us”. 15. “Bacon and Descartes set up observation and reason as new authorities. all humans have the source of knowledge in them. Popper.17 Both Bacon and Descartes agree that there is no need to appeal to a higher authority. 19 New authorities have been erected: instead of Aristotle and the Bible. Conjectures and Refutations.20 At stake here is the freedom of man to think. not only in Descartes but also in Bacon’s form. which seemed to function.18 It may be somewhat strong to suggest. the part which is the source of our fallible opinions (doxa). the senses and the intellect were the authorities. i. 7.

If it is a knowl21 22 Popper. 175. Such a state of tutelage I call ‘self-imposed’ if it is due. It is thinking without being conditioned by outside authorities. Kant’s work provided the intellectual backbone for the new era on the European continent. Kant. the Critique of Pure Reason. . 178. Conjectures and Refutations. Conjectures and Refutations. Where Bacon and Descartes were cautious. a step towards the liberation of the human intellect from any outside agency. Popper outlines two basic steps in the work of Kant. Popper’s analysis of Kant starts with a quote from Kant on the definition of Enlightenment: “[it is] the emancipation of man from a state of self-imposed tutelage… of the incapacity to use his own intelligence without external guidance. the last couple of centuries. has had a major influence on contemporary theology. N° 9 We understand this as humanity’s struggle for independent thinking. not to lack of intelligence.”22 Kant’s definition clearly summarizes the basic program of the Enlightenment: the freedom of the individual human beings to think and to define reality for themselves. The kind of rationalism that has been defining the European mind-set. but to lack of courage or determination to use one’s own intelligence without the help of a leader. Kant made the next step. This is the battle-cry of the Enlightenment. Sapere aude! Dare to use your own intelligence. Popper.21 The student of theology who wants to understand the shape of modern theology has to take into consideration the impact Kant’s thinking has had. A step beyond classical empiricism and rationalism is Popper’s treatment of the Enlightenment. Nature or God. The first step is the clear definition of the limits of knowledge. The contribution of this ‘rebellion’ was and still is the affirmation of the autonomous human being as the ultimate and true agent of knowledge. is the one who systematized the achievements of classical empiricism by declaring the independence of ‘pure reason’ in his major work. as the most prolific figure of this period.122 Teoloãki åasopis. Popper places the significance of Kant’s oeuvre alongside the American and French revolutions.

Human knowledge thus cannot reach beyond what is given in the world. but an inductive knowledge. 179. Kant’s second step. however exalted.e.25 Within the parameters of the Kantian understanding of Ethics. . as the ultimate basis of ethics”. It is not a deductive knowledge anymore. …The doctrine of autonomy . Popper also notes that “in Kant’s own striking formulation of this view ‘our intellect does not draw its laws from nature. The theory of the free thinking human being crystallizes most evidently in Kant’s ethics. in Popper’s analysis. but only in the human intellect. but that the human being himself is the one who is the judge of the truth of an ethical demand.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 123 edge freed from ‘authorities’. then the critical question is how far can that kind of knowledge or intellect reach? To answer the question one must look into Kant’s relevant ideas on time and space.the doctrine that we cannot accept the command of an authority. projection. however. 180. we see even more clearly the relevance of the above overview. Since knowledge is not found ‘out there’. Conjectures and Refutations. the human being becomes a free agent. is the humanization of knowledge. because they precede Kant’s critique of religion. He asserted that “our ideas of space and time are inapplicable to the universe as a whole”23. Popper. Popper explains “Kant wrote his Critique in order to establish that the limits of sense experience are the limits of all sound reasoning about the world”. Since the Middle Age there has been a gradual move towards the in23 24 25 Popper. Popper’s survey of Kant and the two steps are important. They can. Conjectures and Refutations. 181. but imposes its laws upon nature’”. be applied to ordinary physical things and events. Popper observes the following. “Kant humanized ethics. In Kant’s critique of religion. there is no certain knowledge only speculation. this means that there is no outside authority. i. The limits of the human intellect are determined by time and space. Conjectures and Refutations. Kant turns the whole Cartesian understanding of the method of knowledge on its head. Beyond that. as he had humanized science.24 In other words. Popper.

124 Teoloãki åasopis. and to worship Him”. and even… if He should reveal Himself to you. but projects his or her own God. The free human being. Knowledge and Rationality The nineteenth and twentieth century theology is dominated by Descartes’s epistemological dictum ego cogito ergo sum. Adriaanse’s critique of classic theology in rooted in this rationality. In our view. these are the key loci that hold Adriaanse’s argument together. Experience. Kant provides the systematic basis on which this epistemological rationality rests. From the moral point of view… you even have to create your God. it is you… who must judge whether you are permitted [by your conscience] to believe in Him. Popper highlights the following words from Kant: “much as my words may startle you. We turn our attention now to Adriaanse’s conception of experience. who does not accept any ‘higher’ authority anymore. N° 9 dependence of human consciousness and reason. is at the heart of modern theology. They are foundational to his critique of classic theology and his theory of religious education. . The Enlightenment is the main paradigm which to a large extent defines contemporary scientific rationality. This self-actualization is one of the main factors which determine the context of twentieth century theology. 182. Conjectures and Refutations. For in whatever way the Deity should be made known to you. Through Popper’s review of the main tendencies in the philosophy of science we come to clearly understand the ideological context in which Adriaanse poses his critique of classic theology. It is formulated more often as a question: how do you know what you know? In other words the certainty of knowledge had to be established in a rational way.26 The freed human being has reached his/her own maturity by becoming the subject of his or her own history. you must not condemn me for saying: every man created his God. in order to worship him as your creator. knowledge and rationality. 26 Popper.

The predominant discussions in theology related to revelation are focused on the possibilities (or impossibilities) of what may 27 Adriaanse. C. Revelation as a theological locus is foundational for all systematic theologies. 1988) 7. Rationality.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 125 We have already noted that theology did not develop in a vacuum. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. knowledge and rationality are discussed is the prolegomena of a theological work.27 The usual theological locus where the issues related to experience. 4 . II Religionphilosophisch” (RGG /VI) 464-467. we want to present a common understanding of revelation in its formal and theological definitions. in the revelatory situation (B). Theologically speaking we are dealing with Adriaanse’s theory of revelation.. the recipient (D) gains an insight (E). specifically to the various theories of knowledge. “Offenbarung. But before we engage with Adriaanse’s problematisation of revelation. 28 Schwöbel. (Kampen: Kok. it becomes clear how Adriaanse thinks about the issues related to theological method and theological rationality. for Adriaanse. H. but struggled to adapt itself to the demands of science. from the author of revelation (A). In the problematisation of revelation. or the methodology of knowledge. of a certain Gehalt (C) (content)..28 The formal structure of revelation may be approached from on the one hand from the perspective of the author and on the other from the perspective of the recipient of revelation. knowledge and rationality.J. is not only about the “how”. who reveals himself in situation (B) in its Gehalt (C) (content) for the recipient (D) with the effect (E). It is the place where theologians have to come to terms with the presuppositions of their theology in relation to the demands of the scientific theory. In what follows. From the perspective of: the author (A). From the perspective of the receiver: in the act of revelation. He takes one step further and explores the possibilities and the validity of knowledge. we will trace in Adriaanse’s work what he sees as the dominant factors on the field of experience.

At stake here is the following critical question: what happens between the sender and the receiver in the act of revelation? What does the receiver ‘get’ or what does he come to know from or about the sender? Or to ask the same question differently: what is the difference. N° 9 or may not happen between the author and the recipient of the revelation. the almighty Creator (A). then what is the . yes there is correlation between God and humans in the act of revelation. if there is any. and through which he enables life in faith as life in the certainty of truth (E). and enables its execution (E). In the Middle Age. Thus God is not the projection of the human mind but the subject of revelation. However. this is the main challenge: can there be any genuine correlation between humans and God? The answer to this challenging question is twofold. In a nutshell. It is apparent from this definition that God is the author (A) of the revelatory act. since the Reformation the focus has shifted mainly towards reason as the place of revelation. His will and His character. (in Christ-atoned). Firstly. makes the truth of the message certain. The recipient of the revelation (D) understands his life situation (B) as brought to light by this act of revelation. manifests His character as Truthful Love (C). The dawn of the Enlightenment went beyond this and brought this traditional relationship of revelation and reason into a problematic relationship. Secondly. this is how the formal structure translates: Israel’s God. when revelation is seen as an act of self disclosure of God. Theologically revelation implies the disclosure of God to humans.126 Teoloãki åasopis. In theological terms. however through the raising of the Crucified One his will for communion with. between reason and ‘otherworldly’ or ‘received’ knowledge? It is often assumed that the kind of knowledge that revelation provides and the nature of human reason are mutually exclusive. There was an obvious correlation between human intellect and divinely revealed knowledge. the presuppositions were more optimistic about the relationship between revelation and reason. in the apostle’s life situation marked by the apparent failure of the mission of Jesus (B). is the content of revelation (C). and at the same time. through which he gives certainty about the truth to those who listen to this message (D). His creatures. reveals Himself.

and therefore 29 Schleiermacher. ‘God’ is a product of human consciousness and it is ultimately bound to it.. He rather focused on the true subject of revelation.30 Barth in a certain sense refused to locate the act of revelation in the human. F.]. One of the most significant examples of these issues is the discussions about the theologies of Schleiermacher and Barth.D. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. K. (Zürich: EVZ-Verlag.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 127 human faculty that receives this act? In other words: when God reveals himself where does revelation land in the human consciousness? These critical questions shed light on the problems of human rationality and the knowledge of God. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. Barth on the other hand sought to reaffirm the otherness of God and thus distinguished the subjectivity of human consciousness from the objectivity of God. Schleiermacher sought to define revelation in terms of the human consciousness as “the feeling of absolute dependence”.. vol I. (Berlin: De Gruyter.E. There was no distinct subject and object relationship. God. 2003).[reprint of the 1831 ed. Finite humans are confined to time and space (classic Kantianism) and therefore they cannot reach beyond what is given in time and space. As the recipient of revelation humans are unable to think of or know God. His assumption is that there is no correlation between God and human beings. but only the thinking and feeling of human beings. By consequence the line blurred between God and humans. Furthermore this means that the possibility of conceiving God as an entity on its own is impossible.29 thus identifying the human intellect and emotion as place where the revelation of God landed. These theological and philosophical considerations are at the basis of Adriaanse’s rejection of the classic understanding of revelation. So talk of the ‘beyond’ does not have the character of time and space. Both theologians answered these questions in their own way. . Barth’s conclusion was then that without revelation there is no correlation possible whatsoever between God and humans. 30 Barth. 1932-1938).

Here we have to make an important remark: he often defines science as an openbare31 discipline. So what is a scientific theory? Adriaanse uses the following definition to identify a scientific theory: it is a sys31 Trans. i. A Theory of Scientific Method Now we have arrived at the point where we can look in more detail at Adriaanse’s systematic formulation of the theory of scientific knowledge. This will help us to understand Adriaanse’s objections against classic theology. because it ought to be present on the public square.128 Teoloãki åasopis.e. So far our study has introduced the rationale of Adriaanse’s arguments. The heart of the problem is not so much the initial experience of God. N° 9 one cannot rationally justify God talk. or even talk about what has happened and what has been experienced? The problem of rational justification is the main point of criticism Adriaanse poses to theology. as widely accessible as possible. First. but the more significant issue of the talk about God or the act of rationalization and coherent speaking about what one has experienced and what has been revealed. This is precisely the core of Adriaanse’s argument for the impossibility of the rationality of classic theology. public. we have to see how Adriaanse defines a scientific theory. It is not a private matter. reception of the revelation. can one still rationally justify. The question which Adriaanse seems to be positing is this: regardless of whether revelation is possible or not. We have to examine at this point the two aspects of the scientific method Adriaanse proposes. We will continue with the systematic formulation of Adriaanse’s theory of knowledge and scientific method. according to which he proposes that all theological work and talk of God ought to be measured by. . meaning that science in its entirety is an open matter and accessible for everyone who engages in it.

These definitions have to refer to a concrete part of reality. Leertouwer. logical consistency is required in the formulation of a coherent theory. Finally. there is also the how of scientific theories. Het verschijnsel theologie. rather. Scientific theories cannot refer to reality as a whole. L. . Krop. they have to demark the specific area which they are about to address. scientific theories cannot be about the whole of reality. taste.. Science is not supposed to concern itself with the totality of all there is. in other words. (Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. one should be able to see.32 It is a rational system of thought and definitions. about a concrete part of reality that is formulated in such a way that it is possible to deduce examinable theories from it. measure and so on. Since theories are claims about reality.A. and particularly not contradictory statements. Second. 32 Adriaanse. What are the right steps towards developing a scientific theory? Or what are the right conditions that make scientific theories possible? Adriaanse lists five conditions that determine how a scientific theory must work: a) Precision – It has to be clearly stated which part of reality one is attempting to describe.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 129 tem of thoughts and definitions. b) Consistency – there should not be any contradiction within the whole of the argument. as accurate as possible. d) Accuracy – The hypotheses which come from a certain theory must be confirmed by facts. and preferably non-contradictory in nature. touch. H. they must be a well defined part of it.J. This point strongly connects to point ‘c’. H. only with a part of it. scientific theories must be verifiable... 1987) 54-56. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie. c) Empirical adequacy – There must be sensory experiences which can be correlated with a specific theory.

We have argued that in its strictest sense theology is talk about God and specifically talk about the identity of God. .130 Teoloãki åasopis. repeatability is not possible. in the sense which is universally valid. To formulate this in a question. Repeatability is much more relevant for the natural sciences. By examining Adriaanse’s criticism of theology we submit our definition to be tested. The reason is that. Adriaanse asks: Is theology possible in the present context of the scientific demands in a university? And if so. according to classic theology God makes Himself known. which Adriaanse omits from his own system and that is repeatability. 33 In other definitions of scientific theories. These methodological considerations bring us to our next point. Adriaanse. goes further in search of a so called scientific theology. one might come across one more point. having established what science and adequate scientific theories are. This search is in actuality about the possibility of theology in an age of science. Or in theological terms: God cannot be 33 Adriaanse. Therefore Adriaanse is not concerned with this aspect of the scientific theory. be said about God? In other words: what can be scientifically asserted about God? His answer is that there is nothing to be said about God in a scientific way. A scientific phenomenon ought to be repeatable at all times with the same exact results. in the field of humanities and in studies such as history. 54-56. the task of the historian is to recover with as much accuracy as possible what has happened. However. When events happen only once. what are those possibilities? The Impossibility of Theology Earlier we have presented our definition of theology. one assumes that he or she may know the past). N° 9 e) General acceptance of presuppositions – every scientific theory works with a certain accepted presupposition (as in historical studies. Adriaanse criticizes precisely this understanding by posing the critical question: what can publicly. Het verschijnsel theologie.

35 Adriaanse. Flesseman-van Leer. We already have seen the five conditions necessary to establish a theory as scientific. Verdonk. 1981). according to Adriaanse. Classic Theology and the Demands of the Modern Scientific Method Adriaanse analyses theology by measuring its scientific merit. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. red. rijksuniversiteit. t.O. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. E. H. en uitgeg. rijksuniversiteit. van Gennep en W. (Nijkerk: Callenbach.36 This very objectification of God is impossible..15. The next step is to put classic theology against these conditions. 36 Het Het specifiek specifiek theologische theologische aan aan een een Berkhof. Here Berkhof talks in more detail about. E. how God is the object (voorwerp) of the study of theology.35 Another critical point Adriaanse makes is that because classic theology is talk about God. The main question here is: how does classical theology measure up to the demands of modern scientific theories? The answer is: 34 Adriaanse. dr.g.34 Revelation. We want to understand the arguments Adriaanse presents and the way he applies the above definition and conditions of scientific theory to classic theology. These are two critical reasons why Adriaanse considers classic theology as being not scientific. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . H. . is not in any way public and therefore the irreconcilable difference remains between the practice of public science and the talk of God.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 131 known unless He revels Himself.v. God is the object of theology. F. 9.

the condition for accuracy is also impossible. is able to measure up to the standards of modern science. if God created the world good. evil is hard to explain consistently).38 The conclusion of the above considerations is that theology only on one point. then why is there evil? Good vs. Theology cannot pretend to deal with reality as a whole.132 Teoloãki åasopis. or presupposition of atheism. which is needed. namely consistency. 3) Empirical adequacy – is clearly impossible for the statements about God. 2) Consistency – essentially consistency is possible in classical theological theories.e. This is the reason why theology has to be classified as a pseudo-science. Therefore Adriaanse’s argument establishes the following: classic theology does not correspond to the demands of a scientific theory therefore is not considered to be a scientific discipline. Where does this leave classic theology? What 37 Science deals with all that is in the world and not with the world itself. They are theoretical in character thus miss empirical adequacy. N° 9 1) Precision – because classical theology deals with the totality of reality (i. The critical question is often asked here of how can one talk about something one has not seen? 4) Accuracy – based on the above empirical in-adequacy. 38 Adriaanse. 5) General acceptance of presuppositions – the presupposition which all classical theologies share is that there is a God. considering issues related to theodicy (e. God and the world as creation37) it does not correspond to the condition of scientific precision. Het verschijnsel theologie. However. however. in today’s understanding of science all theories are developed from the vantage point. . in reality it is much harder. it ought to focus on a specific point of reality. 57-63.g.

redefinition and affirmation of theology we call a living discipline. theologians are faced with the same kind of challenges. Second. Here we understand the word ‘God’ to mean an entity in itself who can be experienced in his revelation in time and space. He suggests that the theologian cannot talk about God. because by its method and content it only provides pseudo-knowledge. Adriaanse through his critique addresses this very challenge. In modern times. This is what it comes down to eventually: the complete loss of the talk of God. is in a situation of crisis. It has always sought to define itself on its own and in the context in which it was practiced. The partial conclusion is this: classical theology when measured by the standards of science is no science. We also have in mind the reformers who in the context of the church developed and reformed theology. probably the most important point for our work: talk of God in a university setting is deemed impossible. We think here of the early church fathers who did theology in the context of various competing philosophies and theologies. This is ultimately what it means the loss talk of God in theology. Historically. The question is: what is the way forward. And third. but only about ‘God. one can trace the development of theology through the ages and come to the conclusion that it is a living discipline. rather. which in turn has an effect on its methodology and content.’ Here ‘God’ means a conceptual entity of the human . presented by the scientific developments. From the vantage point of the scientific method and philosophy of science theology as a discipline faces one the most critical challenges of our time. adaptation. as understood in the classical sense. Theology thus. The Complete Loss of the “Talk of God” The implication of the above argumentation is that scientifically there is nothing to be said about God. It is a challenge that goes right to the heart of what theology is. he qualifies its object. God.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 133 are the consequences? First. if there is nothing to be said about God as such? Adriaanse is not about to discard theology. it loses its position as one of the sciences in the universities. in order to be able to maintain any standing. This constant growth. it has to fall under general religious studies.

63. Therefore the object of research is the religious human subject. This is a significant move. After Schleiermacher and Feuerbach religion is understood to be the deepest longing of human beings. where religion is researched as a cultural phenomenon. Since 1876. This kind of organization has led to the decentralization of theology and to the compartmentalization of the various theological disciplines. This often causes uneasiness for theologians trying to find their way in this new constellation of sciences. religious science has found its home in cultural studies. Here classic subjects such as exegesis come under the department of arts. As one might expect classic theology is only taught in faculties which are affiliated with a specific church and denomination. Religious philosophy is 39 Adriaanse. Religious studies and science is a fairly recent development in the field of sociology and cultural anthropology. In the public faculties religious science is increasingly taught of as part of the greater humanities. has had a political and administrative influence on the organization of the public universities and their faculties in the Netherlands.’39 When ‘talk of God’ is lost. The general tension between religious science and theology remains. This turn. It is a shift from theology to anthropology. Het verschijnsel theologie. scientifically. one can only ask about religion. the ultimate object of theology is not God but the human beings who talk about ‘God. N° 9 mind. practical and pastoral theory under psychology and-so-forth. one religion among other religions. Since the Enlightenment. the public universities function as duplex ordo. has moved from its dominant and privileged position into being considered. to the subject. all that remains is talk of human religiosity.’ Thus. meaning the human attitude towards ‘God. which means that there is a separation between public universities and church theology. also finds its roots in this age. .134 Teoloãki åasopis. closely related to religious science. during this century. The theologian has to talk about ‘God’ only in terms of what human beings think about ‘God. Christianity. Religious philosophy.’ Therefore. church history under the general department of history.

40 We previously have seen what the loss of the ‘talk of God’ entails as meant by Adriaanse. . Het verschijnsel theologie. Adriaanse. meaning a ‘God’ as talked about by people. In philosophical terms. in theology. Conclusion The working thesis of our study is that theology fundamentally is talk about God and more specifically talk about the identity of 40 41 42 Adriaanse. as is the case with dogmatics. The focus. seen or talked about as an entity of its own reality. a divinity. Adriaanse. is no longer on the Theos but on the human being. i. it presents and explains religion as a universal human possibility. This in turn begs the question: How does one talk about God in a publicly responsible way? The short answer to this question according to Adriaanse is religious science. Het verschijnsel theologie. The quotation marks have a very specific purpose in defining the division. rather. 63. 89-96. God. Theology in this sense is about religion.41 Adriaanse then concludes that the scientific character of religious science can be maintained as long as there is a clear demarcation from classic theology. This might seem speculative in nature but it is a real differentiation. this move is a move from metaphysics to religious and cultural anthropology. is impossible.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 135 not about showing the truth of one religion against the other. By consequence it is religious anthropology. Only a human definition of ‘God’ is valid matter to study for the theologian or the scientist of religion. Adriaanse further develops the following differentiation to show the essential divergence between religious science and theology: Theology must be about ‘God’. Het verschijnsel theologie. Only the human word about ‘God’ is the object of research and science. Religion understood as an expression of a whole range of human projections on ‘God’.e.42 This demarcation has to be maintained as strictly as possible.73.

We have submitted our thesis to the test in light of the religious scientific critique of theology. Exactly those developments are problematic when it comes to theology and specifically to God talk. H. The reason is that God.J. is a non-academic discipline. Then it considers this God inaccessible and impossible to talk about Him. N° 9 God.136 Teoloãki åasopis. Adriaanse’s work was the guideline for discussing the matters related to the test. We formulated Adriaanse’s challenge in the following question: does theology deserve the adjective ‘academic’? Is there a kind of God talk that is justified or at least plausible for such an academic discourse? Considering the main narrative texts of our theological tradition (the basic texts in the Bible) and the long and rich history of God talk. Our main argument against Adriaanse is that we do not talk about God as the one who is above the line unrelated to His presence. Adriaanse has a concept of God. we can say that we understand that there might be difficulties considering the scientific developments of the last century. as such. which is other than the paradigm of God talk in Israel and the Church. Adriaanse in his criticism of classic theology focuses on the wrong God. Modern scientific theory works with a definition of God as a metaphysical transcendent being. By using the term ‘identity’. what we were dealing with is the understanding of the word ‘God’. He argues that. His conclusion is: theology considered from a scientific perspective. One can only talk about ‘God’ as a concept. Essentially. It was meant to compare theology to the scientific demands for an academic discipline. which is . theology defined as talk about God. which is intrinsically related to human religious consciousness and the human ability to project a higher being. but we talk about God who is present in His acting in the history of His people. is impossible. is a metaphysical matter and thus not open for public inquiry. we point toward a dynamic understanding of the word ‘God’. Therefore Adriaanse calls for the abandonment of theology and proposes ‘religious studies’ as a more ‘scientific’ alternative. considering the scientific developments of the last two centuries. To answer Adriaanse’s challenge. The identity of God substantiates what we understand by the word ‘God’. there is no reason why theology ought not to be an academic discipline.

ultimately emanates from the religious imagination of humans. God has an identity and is not merely a definition. talks to them. The way we talk about God is neither the theoretical ‘God’ of philosophy nor a God who is only proclaimed in the Word. where God is defined as a high being which exists outside the reality we experience as human beings. He appears to people. which means that He is free to be and act according to His own will. He is not to be manipulated nor used for their purposes. i. The way we understand the word ‘God’ is the way biblical narratives identify God. He does so not outside the perceived reality but in the reality of their lives. It is by grace that He enters . but the God who is identified in the history of His people. there He is as well. He does things like saving people. Time and time again we hear the motto: YHWH is God and not the idols. God talk. namely to show that the identity of God is decisive for their respective theologies. is a reminder of this very truth. therefore He does not fit any philosophical system or rationality that tries to domesticate Him according to its own rules. When we talk about God we talk about YHWH. Adriaanse’s criticism of theology pertains exactly to this ‘God’. qualifies the meaning of the word ‘God’. They have to live with the knowledge that their God is God. He understands classic theology as being about a constructed ‘God’. Theologians through the ages have struggled with this very issue. and relates to them so much that there is talk of a marriage between God and His people.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 137 fundamentally defined by the Name of God. theologically speaking. The biblical narratives identify God as a person who gives His Name and where His Name is called upon. This is precisely the problem. YHWH. Through those narratives God exists as a separate entity who talks. in their history.e. the biblical narratives about YHWH. i. YHWH does not conform to the ideals of His people. He does not simply exist: He acts. The word ‘God’. one of the most basic and important confession of Israel. for Adriaanse. The Shema. acts and moves. It is not a constructed understanding of the word. We understand that theology pertains to this God. The Name.e. judging people and restoring them. His people’s history is His history as well. address. That is the reason why he opts for understanding the word ‘God’ as a human projection.

This is the reason why knowing God is not a matter of epistemology but of history. YWHW.138 Teoloãki åasopis. Just like a married couple. Therefore we see no reason why theologians should abandon theology as God talk. N° 9 into the vulnerable covenantal bond with them. The history of Israel. . the participants become one and share the same history. which tell of God and who He is. by being in relationship they are one. would be to ignore these texts and what they say about God. Biblical theology shows the way of talking about God and His identity and also that to whom God speaks become the carriers of His presence in this world. We have made it plausible that in biblical theology there is no indication why theology should be seen anything less than talk about God as He indentified Himself in the history of His people. attaches His identity to them. as the cumulative experiences of those whose lives have been addressed. but we who have heard also talk about God. humanity and the world. touched and defined by this God. So there is a concrete place where not only God speaks. To follow Adriaanse and denounce theology. Even though they are two different people. as not being God talk. The nature of the texts and their content puts us into a position where we can affirm that theology is indeed talk about God in a specific way about His identity. is YHWH’s history in their interrelated identities. The texts give voice to those human experiences. by participating in the lives of His people.

Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. en uitgeg. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden .J.v. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. 1982. red..J. E. Proslogion: 1965. 1932-1938 Edition.A. Flesseman-van Leer. Krop. A.. H. 1987. 1981. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Charlesworth..Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 139 Bibliography Adriaanse. H. 1988. Kampen: Kok. vol I. trans. Het verschijnsel theologie. New Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. K. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie. t. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. L. K. Beek van de. H. 2002. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. Nijkerk: Callenbach. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. H. Adriaanse.. God kennen – met God leven. with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. Barth.g.O. E. van Gennep en W.. Anselm. F. .. Nijkerk: Callenbach.J.. Berkhof. H. Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. Barth. Verdonk. Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom.. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. dr. M. Leertouwer.

London: Routledge. 1997.) Karl Popper. vol.. “Offenbarung. J. H. A. Systematic Theology. 2000. 1997. Christian Theology. K. 2nd Ed. Berlin: De Gruyter. S. O’Hear. McGrath. N° 9 Berkhof.].. Christelijk Geloof. (ed. 1963.. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. 1.1. Oxford: Blackwell.D.140 Teoloãki åasopis. F.E. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers.. 2002. 2003.R. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. R. 8e druk. London: Routledge.W. [reprint of the 1831 ed. An Introduction. Popper. Kampen: Kok. Theology for the Community of God. vol. Schleiermacher. II Religionphilosophisch” RGG4 /VI . The Triune God. A. Oxford: Oxford University Press. C. Jenson.E.. Schwöbel. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt.. Grenz. Conjectures and Refutations.. 2004...

Ethnicity. However. The Evangelical church is therefore a neutral place where people with different ethnic identities can meet each other. In a post-war city like Mostar in Bosnia and Hercegovina religious identity is one of the main markers of division between different groups. reconciliation in itself is not an intentional objective of the church. This church plays an interesting role in a society that is characterised by clearly divided groups. .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 141 UDK 284. Evangelical Church. This article discusses reconciliation in the Evangelical church in Mostar. there are religious groups that can contribute to the peace-building efforts. One.991(497. However. Reconciliation. Key words: Religion. therefore would not expect religion to play a positive role in the process of reconciliation between Islamic Bosnian Muslims and Catholic Bosnian Croats. Religious Anthropology. Identity and Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar Abstract: Religion is seen by many as one of the main causes of the conflict between people in the Balkans.6Mostar) Praying on the Front-Line Religion. Conflict. Peace-building. Evangelical believers do not fit in any of the main people groups because the main criterion for belonging to a group is religious background. Identity. Mostar. Bosnia and Hercegovina. This can serve as a first step in the process of reconciling conflicting groups.

Serbs and Croats alike (Zaitchik. The constant threat of attacks in all major cities in Europe has its impact 1 In the English literature the term Bosnia is normally used for the country as a whole. I will make it explicit. or the Herzegovinian part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I will mainly use the abbreviation BiH throughout this article. Instead of using the full name of the state: Bosnia and Herzegovina. see themselves as Herzegovinians rather than Bosnians. 2006). Religion and religious groups in the Balkans are usually associated with conflict rather than with reconciliation. when I specifically intend to say something about the Bosnian. The argument for choosing Bruce Lee is that he is worshipped by Muslims. Strangely enough the symbol for unity is a statue of kung fu legend Bruce Lee. Madrid and London almost ten years ago have shocked the world. The tension between Islamic cultures and the western world is still in the news on a daily basis. However. The main subject of this article is the role of reconciliation between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. This subject is relevant to many people for several reasons. I do not want to deny the contribution of religion to the conflict. but my primary focus in this article is on the contribution of religion and religious groups to the reconciliation process. . where I did my research. This peculiar choice shows how hard it is to find a suitable symbol for unity in the complex situation of this country. The statue showed Lee in a typical fighting pose. People from Herzegovina. The first reason is related to the current global political situation. a monument for unity had been erected in Mostar. The terrorist attacks on New York. At first sight this subject may seem contradictory in itself. It may seem strange to look for reconciliation in a religious group. A lot of attention has been given to the way religion was used as justification of violence in the war at the end of the 20<^th century in former Yugoslavia. N° 9 Introduction Ten years after the violent ethnic conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina1 came to an end.142 Teoloãki åasopis.

this subject is also relevant to those working for grass roots organisations doing peace building. for centuries. the debate about the Bosnian conflict between Muslims and Christians speaks into the debates about this same conflict in other parts of the world. With this article I hope to contribute to this discussion. Although the context in BiH is different from most other places in the world. Cities like Sarajevo and Mostar have a long history of dealing with different religions and cultures within its boundaries. Reconciliation is one of the main objectives of many humanitarian organisations There is a lot of discussion about the possible strategies that can be used to achieve reconciliation. In 1993 the old Ottoman bridge of Mostar was destroyed before the eyes of the world. I have chosen to do my research in a small church. It is hard to define the boundaries of an Evangelical Church. When I write about the Evangelical Church I mean the group of people that comes to activities organised by the church on a regular basis . It is not my objective to define who is a true evangelical and who is not. either in the Balkans or anywhere else in the world.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 143 on the debate about pluralistic and multi-ethnic societies. been a symbol of religious and cultural tolerance. The rebuilding of the bridge has accordingly become a symbol of reconciliation. Terrorist attacks throughout the world raise questions about religious and cultural tolerance and the way ethno-religious groups can live alongside each other. The specific context of the Evangelical Church in Mostar naturally makes it hard to generalise any conclusions. The central question in this article is ‘What is the role of the reconciliation process between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar?’ My focus is on reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. For centuries the Balkans have been the bridge between Christian and Islamic culture. into a symbol of cultural and religious conflict. though I am fully aware that this study is a mere starting point. Apart from the topicality of religion and reconciliation on a global scale. no defined membership exists. In the church where I did my research. I think it is impossible to draw . This act of destruction changed what had.

In order to be able to draw any conclusions on a reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church. The role of reconciliation in a church is very dependent on the specific circumstances. This does not mean that my findings are of no value for any other context. Churches differ from place to place and the church in Mostar differs in many ways from a church in Amsterdam or even in Sarajevo. the answers to my questions are based on the specific situation of the conducted research. Nevertheless. Reconciliation can have a comparable role in various contexts. five sub-questions need to be looked at. N° 9 conclusions about the role of reconciliation in churches in general. • How do people in Mostar in general construct their identity? • How do evangelical Christians in Mostar construct their identity? • What role does ethnicity play in the church? • What kind of relationships do evangelical Christians from different ethnic backgrounds have in Mostar? • In what way does the Evangelical Church actively support reconciliation? .144 Teoloãki åasopis.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

145

Conceptual Framework
Some of the concepts that have been used in this article could be confusing and their boundaries need to be defined. A first concept that needs clarification is religion. The role of religion in the Balkan conflicts is often debated. For a good understanding of the role of religion and religious groups in the processes of both conflict and reconciliation, it is necessary to explain how I define religion in this context. There are many definitions of religion in use, but the discussion on the definition has two extremes2. On one of the spectrum scholars define religion by the function it has in society. From this functionalistic perspective religion is for example everything that is used to give man a higher purpose in life. The difficulty with definitions like this is that the existence of religion is explained by its function. Religion is in this way reduced to a human functional construct. On the other end of the spectrum are the scientists that use a substantial definition of religion. A famous example is Tylor’s definition. He states that ‘religion is the belief in spiritual beings’ (Lambek, 2002: 21). This definition comes close to the popular use of the word religion in common parlance. In this perspective there is hardly any attention for the function religion fulfils in society. The focus is on the substantial characteristics of religion. In theology this last approach to religion is more common. In the social sciences there is more attention on the functional aspects of religion. It is not surprising that most anthropologists use a more functional definition of religion, because anthropology has human behaviour in society as its object of study. In the analysis of processes of conflict and reconciliation in a religious group it makes sense to use a functional definition of religion. But I want to avoid giving the impression that I see religion as a human construct. In this article I give an anthropological perspective
2 I divide the definitions of religion in substantial and functional definitions following Berger (Berger 1967: 194). In the first appendix to The Sacred Canopy, Berger discusses the sociological definitions of religion.

146

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

and therefore my focus is unavoidably on the functional aspects of religion. Religion is part of the total framework of systems of meaning making that people use to define their position in reality. Religion can therefore be seen as a part of culture. Religion is that part of culture that is connected to the belief in a supernatural reality. A human being is capable of constructing religion and reshaping religion. On the other hand religion has impact on the way people think and act. It is therefore of crucial importance in the way people deal with issues of conflict and reconciliation. The second concept that needs some clarification is identity. Just like religion, the word identity is often used without a clarified meaning. Identity seems to be a fashionable topic and only a few decennia ago the concept was hardly ever used in the social sciences. Identity is becoming more important, because boundaries are becoming less clear. People have to find out who they are and to which group they belong. Identity says on the one hand something about the essence of a group or a person. On the other hand the concept has to do with the outside boundaries that separate one entity from another. Identity plays a role when clear boundaries are sought. When a group wants to distinguish itself from a different group, it will stress its identity. In this case identity has to do with difference. In other cases identity plays a binding role. The concept is then used to stress things that members of a group have in common. In this case identity has to do with similarity. These two aspects, difference and similarity, are central to identity. This shows why it is such a multifaceted concept. I define identity as the common aspects of a group that distinguish one group from others. It should be noted that every person has multiple identities and these change over time (Lifton 1995: 1-20). The boundaries of group identities run through groups that have a shared identity. Let me illustrate this with an example from Mostar. A Christian teenager who lives in West Mostar and comes from a Muslim background has multiple conflicting identities. He is young, ethnic Muslim, religiously Christian, West Mostarian, Herzegovinian etcetera. In different situations this person will stress different identities. In one situations he might focus on the characteristics he shares with certain

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

147

people and in different situations he might stress those things that distinguish him from these same people. In the complex situation where religion, nationality and ethnicity are all intertwined, identity plays a crucial role. When we look at conflict and reconciliation we have to take notion of the complex system of identities and the ways these are constructed. It has much impact on the way groups and individuals interact. In everyday use, identity is often regarded as something static. People have one identity and it never changes. It is important to realise that people think about identity in this way. The ideas that people have about identity have impact on the way they behave and these ideas form a part of the social reality that I study (Baumann, 1999: 81-96). There is no point in neglecting the existence of these ideas even though I think these ideas are based on a misunderstanding of identity. In the analysis of social developments in BiH it is impossible to neglect the concept of ethnicity. Ethnicity is a form of identity. It is the identity of a group that sees itself as being culturally distinctive from other groups. Eriksen points to the fact that for ethnicity to come about, groups must at least have some form of social contact (Eriksen, 2002: 12). Ethnicity is a relational concept and not the property of a group. A strong tendency exists throughout BiH to essentialise ethnicity and therefore people’s ethnic identities. According to most people a person is Croat, Serb or Muslim. Birth determines to which of these groups one belongs. Every group claims to have a separate origin and history. This essentialist understanding of ethnicity is for a great deal based on myths of clearly distinguishable people groups (Baumann, 1999: 65, 66). Dubious interpretations of history often form the basis for these ideas. An example of this is the conviction that exists throughout BiH about the history of the Bosnian Church during the Middle Ages. Many times during my fieldwork, people tried to convince me of the fact that their ancestors had been Bogomils. To them this was proof of the Bosnians not being Catholics like the Croats. The actual historical evidence for this assumption is minimal. Nevertheless, many Bosnian Muslims still believe this. For them it is part of the justification of an independent Bosnian state. This exemplifies how people interpret history to draw

148

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sharp boundaries between ethnic groups. These boundaries are quite problematic in BiH, because it is hard to distinguish Croats, Serbs and Muslims from each other. They all generally have the same appearance and until the war they spoke the same Serbo-Croatian language. The only clear difference is their religious conviction. and this difference is therefore strongly articulated. Religion is not only used to distinguish one from the other, it also serves as a moral justification for hatred towards the other group. Although I believe that this essentialist idea of ethnicity is based on questionable argumentations, I do believe it strongly influences developments in BiH and still continues to do so. It is interesting to see that ethnic groups in BiH point to their long separate histories, while at the same time differences are being created in the present. The separate languages, for example, are a recent phenomenon. As I have said earlier, people are being transformed by the systems of meaning making that they construct themselves.

Research Methods3
In order to find answers to the question under consideration I undertook anthropological research. The research methods I chose are typically for cultural anthropology. Most of my findings stem from the material I collected in fieldwork I did in the first half of 2005 in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. To find answers to the formulated questions I conducted qualitative research. This seemed the most suitable method to find answers to my questions. Relationships between people in a church can hardly be studied through surveys or other quantitative methods. Furthermore, many of my questions regard personal experiences. Building a relationship of trust is of crucial importance to achieve insight in people’s convictions. From February till June 2005 I stayed in Mostar and became part of the local Evangelical Church. Subsequently participant observation became my main
3 The research was part of my studies at the Social and Cultural Anthropology department of the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam.

I visited many official church-activities like Sunday services. youth meetings. Most of them were aid workers and missionaries. I have interviewed mostly young people and church leaders. drinking coffee or just walking on the street5. Therefore I spent a lot of time with people in smaller groups and one-on-one. like I said before. it was harder for me to get in contact with them. This was a good way to speak with people about various matters. The big drawback of this is that the interview setting is somewhat unnatural. The data obtained from interviews may perhaps be clear but less reliable. Although the people in the church knew I was doing research. One advantage of interviewing over mere observation is that it produces very clear data. people regarded me as just another foreigner in church4. The older people in church are mostly women and. . In the four months I spent in Mostar I successfully integrated in the church and created some good relationships. As I said. It was important to get to know people from the church also on a personal level. For me as a young man it was easiest to get in contact with young people and mostly with men. Next to participant observation I also used interviews as a research method. Most of them had never heard of anthropology and had no clue what my research was about. I have tried to integrate into the church as much as possible. This has to do with the demographic composition of the church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 149 research method. creating confidential relationships is crucial for qualitative research. but also many informal activities like birthdays and barbecues. It was harder for me to get in contact with older women in church. 4 Usually. 5 Drinking coffee and walking around in town are the main pastimes among the Mostarians. All names of informants in this article are fictitious. relatively many foreigners came to church. bible studies and worship meetings.

I am aware of the danger of an essentialist approach. One person helps building the house of his brother in exchange for another service. In his book ‘The Multicultural Riddle’ Baumann clearly shows how essentialist ideas have developed and what the results are: ‘Ethnicity and ethno-politics rely on rhetorics that trace cultural differences to biological differences. In the complex situation of Mostar essentialist ideas about ethnicity and religion are both present and problematic. A policeman will not fine one of his friends. In BiH this is more the case than in many Western countries. In this section I will discuss ethnic and religious identity. belonging to a network also provides a feeling of security. further strengthen essentialist ideas. Many Mostarians aspire to belong to clearly restricted groups. It is assumed that all Muslims are alike and that it has always been like that. The war has not only geographically divided Mostar in two. Apart from practical advantages. Together people form a network in which personal interests are looked after. N° 9 Identity The war has turned Mostar into a divided city. This is not only the case among politicians but also among ordinary people. It also widened the gap between groups. Being part of a network offers people practical opportunities. Identity politics. People feel safe in the street when they . Notions of belonging are of crucial significance to people in general and especially in Mostar. or the categorisation of people into strictly defined groups.150 Teoloãki åasopis. In BiH and in Mostar many people have an essentialist approach towards ethnicity. and identity construction. Religion is being essentialised in similar ways. they aim at purifying and canonizing the cultural essences that they have reified…’ (Baumann. 1999: 67). It is often via friends or family that people acquire a job or legal permission to start a business or build a house. ethnicity and nationality are markers used to define one’s identity. An essentialist approach of ethnicity and religion freezes the conflict between groups and it closes the gates for reconciliation. One is labelled a Muslim or a Christian. Religion. These groups have formed strong and opposing identities. Religions are often being divided along strict lines.

Otherwise anthropological fieldwork would . Religion is for most people in Mostar the factor that determines to which group they belong. The way Muslims perceived their religion before the war has totally been transformed by the war. Seeing ethnicity and religion as human constructs that show much diversity and change over time does not make them less real (Baumann. this hope is reinforced by the affirmation of people around them. When I asked a person about his ethnicity.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 151 know that they are part of the same group as others. It is impossible to give a definition of a Croat. This way of discussing identity assumes an essentialist understanding of both ethnicity and religion. 1999: 64). I clearly want to acknowledge that both religion and ethnicity are mainly human constructs. or Croatian identity. Muslim and Evangelical identity. There is much variety within these categories and moreover they are constantly being transformed. Nationality and ethnicity are not very clear categories and many people are confused about the boundaries of categories. Bringa states that her book ‘contains ethnographic data which are now history’ (Bringa. is large in Mostar. Nevertheless I will try to give a general picture of ethnic and religious identity in the way I encountered it in Mostar. Religion defines a person’s ethnic group. Croatian culture. Furthermore people feel supported in their convictions by others. Children from mixed marriages. With all these exceptions it seems impossible to have an essentialist approach to religion or ethnicity in Mostar. Belonging to a group offers human security in precarious situations. In her book ‘Being Muslims the Bosnian way’. but still many people do. I will separately discuss Croatian. At the same time this is not easy in Mostar. The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for strongly attached groups. (Baumann. 1995: 198). The amount of people that form an exception in some way or another. If a person for example believes in life after death. on several occasions a people would answer: “I am a Christian”. 1999: 85) Also Evangelical Christians do not really fit in one of the main categories in Mostar. as Baumann calls them. or ‘eccentrics’. but at the same time a person’s religion is determined by a one’s ethnicity. refugees and displaced persons often have no clear idea about to which group they belong.

the east . Different groups overlap here and people have multiple identities. Many destroyed buildings around the old front line form a visible scar. In this section I will first discuss factors in identity construction in Mostar as a whole. West of Mostar lives a vast Croat majority. For example. Croats and Muslims managed to live in peaceful coexistence for a long period of time. Serbs. the surrounding region lacks much diversity. After that I will discuss separately Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat identity. On the Hum Mountain south-west of Mostar. an enormous cross was erected in 2000. West and East Mostar had been ethnically cleansed: The west side was almost totally Croatian. Just like BiH reflects the complex mixture of peoples of the former Yugoslavia. One cannot walk through Mostar without seeing this cross. The region east of Mostar is a Serb dominated area. Nearly all Serbs had fled the city.152 Teoloãki åasopis. The people in the church were part of larger ethnic groups. The city has a long history of ethnic tolerance. Neither can one walk through Mostar without hearing the loud sound of the prayer call from the minarets’ speakers that are turned towards the west side of town. Everyone who visits Mostar for the first time is immediately confronted with the wounds of the war. Minarets and the colossal church tower of one of the catholic cathedrals define the skyline of Mostar. N° 9 not make any sense. My research population consisted of the evangelical community in Mostar. so Mostar can be seen as a small scale BiH. Bosnian Muslim and evangelical. and identity of evangelicals in Mostar. a person can at the same time be Mostarian. The war has changed the face of Mostar beyond recognition. It is important to realise that although Mostar had a very diverse population. Constructing Identity in Mostar: Communal Factors A number of factors have significant influence on the way identity is being constructed in Mostar as a whole. The erected religious buildings form a conspicuous mark of the division.

These elections were the first in BiH after the Dayton Agreements. Schools on the west side have a curriculum that differs from east side schools. Citizens of Mostar voted strongly along nationalistic lines. One of them was the introduction of common license plates for cars so people could travel through the city freely. People from surrounding villages had taken their places (Bose. Another important development in the reintegration process was the introduction in 1998 of one currency: the convertible mark (Bose. which function as separate bodies. There was not much left of the once so pretty town of Mostar. including ‘stari most’ were destroyed. In east side schools pupils learn Bosnian . In June 1996 the first municipal elections were held in Mostar.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 153 side had become almost 100% Muslim. After the elections a local city council was formed with representatives from all ethnic groups. Many young and educated people with opportunities had left Mostar and the country. 2002: 112). The return of refugees did not go as fast in the first years after the war in Mostar as elsewhere in the country. The character of the city had changed tremendously. The representation was based on the pre-war demographic composition of Mostar. All bridges across the Neretva. In practice the west and the east have separate police forces. The city was turned into a depressive scene. 2002: 108). It breathed death and destruction. In west side schools pupils learn Croatian language. 106). Around the front-line all major buildings were ruined. The EUAM (European Union Administration of Mostar) had the difficult task of supervising the initial reconstruction and the reintegration of Mostar (Bose. but this was not much more than a formality. At the same time a multi-ethnic police force was established. The same can be said of many institutions. An important element of division in Mostar is the educational system. Some important steps towards unification were taken in the first few years after the war. 2002: 105. although pupils can choose for ethics instead. Not much was left of the old Ottoman centre of town. Croatian history and have catholic religious classes.

154

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

language6 Bosnian history and have Islamic religious classes. The gymnasium on Spanish Square in the centre of Mostar is the only school that uses curricula for both Muslims and Croats. This school is the pride of the international community, often given as an example of the success of reintegration Mostar. It is disappointing to see though that even here still classes are separated and that Croatian and Muslim children do not have much mutual contact. Mostar also has two universities, one on the east side and one on the west side. Between the two hardly any cooperation exists. East and West Mostar are marked by division and the two function in many ways as separate cities. Globalisation is another factor that has impact on identity in Mostar as a whole. In his book on globalisation and identity, Appadurai points to the effect of globalisation on, amongst others, BiH (Appadurai, 1999: 305-324). He substantiates that globalisation brings about insecurity in people’s ideas on what their identity is. Old divisions have become less strict and maintaining a specific local identity becomes harder due to the constant influx of information from other parts of the world. According to Appadurai the insecurity about people’s identity is one of the main driving forces behind the horrible violence that came to BiH in the war. Clear boundaries between groups have become more fluid as a result of globalisation. Another result of globalisation; the increase of recourses of information, causes a reverse dynamic. It is nowadays easier for a Muslim in Mostar to feel part of a global Muslim community, than it was 20 years ago. The same can be said of Catholics. Television and Internet enlarge knowledge and awareness of worldwide connections and antagonisms. The growing conflict between the Western world and the Islamic world cannot stay unnoticed in BiH and Mostar. The presence of a large group of foreigners is another factor that impacts identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The recon6 Bosnian and Croatian language are very much alike. Before the war all people in BiH spoke Serbo-Croat. Since the war separate languages exist, although the differences seem in many cases artificial.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

155

struction of BiH after the Dayton agreement attracted many international organisations. Chandler calls BiH the world’s capital of interventionism (Chandler, 1999: 2). People are more and more fed up with the aid of the international community, but at the same time the city became strongly dependent on this foreign aid. Without aid Mostar would turn into an administrative chaos. Reconstruction would stop and for example public transport would probably collapse7 The international community plays a dual role in people’s lives. This relationship of dependency and contempt with the international community also impacts the way Mostarians view themselves and others.

Bosnian Muslim Identity
As I have said earlier, it is difficult say anything about an ethnic group without falling into the pitfall of essentialism. One is inclined to use generalisations. An advantage of my research is that my informants are part of a group that does not seem to fit into any system of categorisation. The Bosnian Muslims form an exception in a predominantly Christian continent. The Bosnian Muslims also form an exception in the Islamic community. Religion is practised in a highly unorthodox way, especially because religion has been suppressed in the communist period. Muslims in the Middle East do not have much in common with Muslims in BiH. I did my fieldwork in an Evangelical Church. The Bosnian Muslims that are part of this church can be seen as an exception to an exceptional group, because although they see themselves as part of the Bosnian Muslim ethnic community, they themselves are Christians8 An oversimplified categorisation is hardly possible in this case. I will first try to give a rough
7 All buses in Mostar have a Japanese flag painted on the side, under which it says that the bus is financed by the Japanese government. 8

The vocabulary is confusing in this matter. Bosnian Muslims form first of all an ethnic category and not a religious category. For most people in this group Islam is used as the main marker in

156

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sketch of the Bosnian Muslim community of Mostar. After that I will describe the Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church. The town of Mostar has a population of about 100,000 people. Approximately half of the population consists of Bosnian Muslims. Although the Muslims of BiH can hardly be compared to Muslims in the Middle East or Turkey, there are many elements in Bosnian Muslim culture that one can trace back to the period of Ottoman occupation. The architecture of the old centre of Mostar and of the biggest part of the east bank differs from the architecture in West Mostar. The Muslim parts of town have small streets with many houses built close together. Some of the architecture has oriental elements. The most important piece of Ottoman architecture is of course the Old Bridge (Stari Most). In the small shops around the Old Bridge Turkish-like artefacts are being sold and Turkish coffee is being served in bars where people play tavla9 In this part of town you hear people say ‘alaikum’as a greeting to each other. Walking around in Mostar’s old town feels a bit like walking in an open-air museum. It does not give a very accurate picture of the everyday life of Bosnian Muslims. In most parts of town one cannot tell which person is a Muslim and which is not. The only Islamic law that is strictly observed is the probation to eat pork. Only a very small proportion of the women wear a head-scarf. The secular character of most Bosnian

their ethnic identity. I use the word term Bosnian Muslim also for those people this group who have converted to Christianity. In most literature the confusion is overcome by using the term Bosniak instead of Bosnian Muslim. This term is hardly ever used by any of my informants. Bosnian Muslims who converted to Christianity nevertheless see themselves mostly as belonging to the ethnic group of Bosnian Muslims. I have chosen to use this emic categorisation. Using the term Bosniak would oversimplify the matter. It is a mixed up reality, not only for the lay outsider, but also for many of my informants themselves.
9

A Turkish board game similar to backgammon.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

157

Muslims has to do with the suppression of religion during the communist period. For a long period of time Muslims were not recognised as an ethnic group of their own. Croats considered them converted Croats, Serbs saw them as converted Serbs. During the Yugoslav period there were no Islamic schools. Muslims from the cities differ in many ways from Muslims in the villages. Bringa shows that traditions play a stronger role in villages than in the cities (Bringa, 1995). A good example in her account is the fact that women change clothes when they go into town. In town they cannot wear their traditional clothes. Of course the situation has changed since Bringa did her research, but I do think that traditions are still much stronger in the villages than in towns like Mostar. In the last 15 years interest in Islam has grown in BiH. The first cause of this development lies in the war. The war hardened the borders between ethnic groups and as I stated before, religion is one of the main markers of difference between groups in BiH. Bosnian Muslim identity is articulated through a shared interest in Islam. A second reason why Islam is taken more seriously recently stems from the global conflict between the west and the Muslim world. People are forced to take sides in this debate. A third cause of the recent revival of Islam in BiH is the financial support that comes from Islamic countries and from Islamic communities in Europe. Throughout the country big mosques are being constructed with help of foreign funds. The Bosnian Muslims that I encountered do not have much interest in Islam. Most Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church consider themselves Christians. However, in many ways they feel part of the Bosnian Muslim community. Their focus is on East Mostar and they speak Bosnian instead of Croatian10 They go to Muslim schools, support FK Veleæ, (the east side football team) and are proud
10

There is not much difference between Bosnian and Croatian, but the small differences are important to people. If I want to buy bread in East Mostar I have to use a totally different word for bread then in West Mostar.

A good example is Boris. Neither Boris nor his wife had regular jobs. . N° 9 of the country of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Although his father had been a religious leader. His wife is also a Bosnian Muslim and she does not go to church. He became a Christian after the war. One daughter has moved abroad where she got married to a former peace-force soldier. It seemed like the work on the first floor and the roof had stagnated a while ago. It was his son who convinced him to come to church. he and his family lived in Mostar. The Mostar he grew up in was a town where it did not matter what religious background one had. They also had a small plot of land where they grew some vegetables. His father was an Imam in Mostar and his grandparents owned much land in the vicinity of Mostar. They lived in a small house with their two sons and two daughters and one grandson. They were kicked out of their house and moved in with his sister who is now also sometimes coming to church. They received help from a humanitarian organisation that was connected to the Evangelical Church. The majority of their family and close friends are Bosnian Muslims. Apart from daily meals and cigarettes they did not have much expenditure. Boris did not believe in Islam. During the war. The house they lived in was only half finished. Just after I left Mostar the oldest son started to look after some goats. whom she met in Mostar. Boris’ father died when Boris was young. The television was always turned on very loud. He went to communist schools in Mostar and in Montenegro.158 Teoloãki åasopis. His parents were Partisans during the Second World War. Apparently the family lived on support from this daughter and from the church. Sometimes Boris was studying some kind of textbook about Christianity. The only big difference is that their religious identity is Christian. Costs of living are not so high. The daily pursuits consisted mainly of drinking Bosnian coffee and smoking. According to Boris. Altogether it was just enough to get by. Mostar used to be the best city of the whole of Yugoslavia. he is a middle-aged man who has been going to the Evangelical Church in Mostar for a few years. Boris grew up in the old town of Mostar. He never prayed until he became a Christian and the only reason why he regarded himself as a Bosnian Muslim was that his father told him so. although nobody was really watching.

I do not think Islam played a significant role in his life. It is also typical that he was not very religious before he became a Christian. The town of Medjugorje is one of the world’s largest places of pilgrimage. they have a marginal position in this community. . Catholicism is the most important marker of identity. Although they definitely consider themselves as Bosnian Muslims. The evangelical Bosnian Muslims cannot really be considered part of the core of this ethnic group. I think this joke tells a lot about the way ethnic identity is being articulated by Bosnian Croats in Mostar. Every year thousands of Catholics from all over the world come to Medjugorje be- 11 Although Boris’ father had been an Imam. mainly through humanitarian aid. Most of them are relatively poor and came in contact with the church during the war or shortly after. I have not met any Bosnian Muslims in church that were part of a family in which Islam played a very significant role11 It is striking that of the evangelical Bosnian Muslims only a small minority lives on the east side of Mostar. The part of Herzegovina west of the Neretva River has been the cradle of hard-line Croatian nationalists. His upbringing had been more communist than Islamic and his father died when Boris was still really young. They say that these Bosnian Croats are more Croatian than the Croats in Zagreb. Bosnian Croat Identity In Zagreb people make fun about the Bosnian Croats in Western Herzegovina.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 159 Boris’ situation is in many ways typical of most of the Bosnian Muslims that come to church. Even the smallest villages in this region have a Catholic church building. Bosnian Croats are proud to be catholic and are in many ways devoted to the church. The red and white chequered flag hangs from almost every lamppost.

On a wall in West Mostar somebody has put this clearly into words with spray-paint: od is Croatian The architectural differences between West and East Mostar are striking. when it is illuminated. Bosnian Croats seem to feel related more to Croatia than to BiH.000 Bosnian Croats in Mostar seem to be wealthier than their east side neighbours. Masses are being attended frequently by most Bosnian Croats. The 50.160 Teoloãki åasopis. This is visible from the cars that people drive and the clothes that people wear. Most of the Bosnian Croats that I interviewed for my re12 The work of Bax (Bax: 1995) provides an extensive anthropological analysis of the developments of the catholic regime in Medjugorje. . During my stay Pope John Paul II died. Two big shopping malls have been built after the war where almost anything is for sale that one could buy in Western Europe. Most of the streets are much wider and there are many big apartment blocks. The commercial centre is much more developed than on the east side. Bosnian Croats celebrate this by driving around town waving Croatian flags. even at night. the atmosphere in West Mostar is much more similar to Western Europe than it is in East Mostar. One of the highest Church towers in Europe has been built in Mostar and as I mentioned before the giant Cross on mount Hum is visible from every corner of town. Faith is connected to the Croatian nation in a very direct way. Where East Mostar has many narrow streets. On the whole. Although most tourist businesses are mainly centred in the old Ottoman part of town. When there is a sports event the Bosnian Croats are always supporting the Croatian teams and when BiH looses a football match. This was reason for a lot of grief in West Mostar. Secularisation as in Western Europe seems nearly absent in present day Herzegovina. the opposite is true for West Mostar. at least among most Catholics. N° 9 cause of the supposed apparitions of Maria since 198112 In Mostar Catholicism also plays an important role in the expression of Croatian identity. most of the other economical activity is to be found in West Mostar.

because it would cause big problems within their family. Breaking with the Catholic Church would cause a break with their family and it would mean a betrayal of their ethnic group. I have a Croatian Passport. I hang around with both. but I am glad that I am Croatian. She was baptised in the Evangelical Church in 1996. Helena lives in West Mostar and has a fairly good job. She is a 25-year-old Bosnian Croatian woman. Many of the young people that come to worship meetings on Wednesdays have never told their family about their baptism. Therefore. It is interesting that all Bosnian Croats that had some connection to the Evangelical Church do live in West Mostar. for Bosnian Croats there is more to loose. Half of my family is Orthodox.” Before Helena became part of the Evangelical Church she only went to the Catholic Church at Easter and Christmas. In the previous section I said that most Evangelical Bosnian Muslims do not live in East Mostar. Helena is an interesting example. Sunday morning they go to the mass with their families. but I’m glad I’m Croatian. . I don’t hate Muslims. Joining the Evangelical Church did not really mean a break with the church or with her family.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 161 search were in many ways proud to be Croatian. Taking this step would implicate a big risk. The majority of the Bosnian Croats I interviewed are part of families that are better of than the families of Bosnian Muslims in Church. She says about her ethnic background: "I can’t say that I’m not glad that I’m Croatian. For other Bosnian Croats who are involved in the Evangelical Church this is a lot more problematic. They keep their involvement with evangelical Christians a secret. For this reason it is impossible for most of them to come to the Evangelical Church on Sunday. I am for a lot of stuff…I live here on the west side and it’s a lot nicer. or I don’t hate Serbs. even though their relationship with the Catholic Church was quite exceptional. that is really a lot easier for me…I don’t really hate anyone.

although it is clear that some people are definitely part of the church and some are not. for many individuals it is not so clear. However. Some people come to almost every meeting. all of them differ from the majority of their ethnic group when it comes to religion. This was for many of them of crucial importance for the way they constructed their identity. religion is the main determinant for most people in Mostar to distinguish between ethnic groups. There is no Baptist church in Mostar. other young people only come to worship meetings on . Religious background determines the group a person belongs to. and many people only come once in a while to activities organised by the church. There are no clear boundaries that determine who is in and who is out. During my fieldwork I have visited many different meetings. The church has no official membership. At all these meetings I met different groups of people. Some of the pastors in BiH have studied at the evangelical theological seminary in Osijek in Croatia. This denomination is connected to the Evangelical Churches in Croatia. Although all of them saw themselves as part of an ethnic group that transcended the church. some young people only come to the youth meetings on Sunday night. In BiH there are two main denominations of protestant churches: Baptist churches and Evangelical/Pentecostal churches. N° 9 Evangelical Identity in Mostar So far. The church in Mostar was founded by Christians from Croatia (Kelly and Sheppard. It is therefore very important for the evangelical Christians in Mostar that they belong to the evangelical Christian community.162 Teoloãki åasopis. For example. others only came to one particular kind of meeting. almost all my informants were in some way or another involved with the Evangelical Church in Mostar. It is therefore really difficult to estimate how big this group of evangelical Christians is. The church in Mostar that I studied is part of the denomination of Evangelical/Pentecostal churches in BiH. It is hard to define the Evangelical Church. As I have said before. Many people are in some way or another involved in the church. Since I did my fieldwork in the Evangelical Church. 1995). I have separately discussed the identity of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats.

On Wednesday evening worship meetings the majority of attendants is Bosnian Croat. On average around 30 to 40 people come to these meetings. Most of the people that come to church did not have much education. People from both East and West Mostar are attending the Brankovac church meetings. Gypsies and some people from England and the United States. Bosnian Croats. The people that come to church activities come from a very mixed ethnical background. Usually about 8-10 people come to these meetings and they are all young people. but some activities there are attended by people from both congregations. On youth meetings on Sunday evening the majority of people is usually Bosnian Muslim and a relatively big group of refugees from other parts of the Balkans attend these meetings13 The number of people that come to these meetings changes a lot. In each of the buildings meetings are being held. Hardly any students come to church although there are two universities in Mostar. Just like any other social group the Evangelical Church has core members and members that take a less central position. The pastor of the church is from a mixed Serb/Croat background. the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: one in East and one in West Mostar. On these meetings there is usually not one dominant ethnic group. Most people that live in these camps have come from Kosovo and some from Macedonia. Significantly. sometimes only a handful show up.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 163 Wednesday night and some come to both. Sometimes 25 people come. Most of the young people are still in school except for some of the refugees. Many people are without a job or have low paid jobs. Many of the refugees are illiterate. . Kosovo Albanians. A normal Sunday morning church service is usually attended by Bosnian Muslims. Most evangelicals in the Mostar church are people with limited opportunities. 13 There are refugee camps in the vicinity of Mostar. I did most of my research in the Brankovac church in East Mostar.

164 Teoloãki åasopis.A. all are very similar to the way these things are done in a Dutch or in an American Evangelical Church. The vision statement of one of these organisations..html . though to a lesser degree. The reconstruction of Mostar attracted many of these missionaries.. the songs that are sung. God is calling this generation of young Bosnians to be agents of positive transformation of their nation.’ 14 Sometimes groups of missionaries from England or the U. Most young people that come to meetings do not go to the church service on Sunday morning. The way a service is organised. In the first place the foreigners add up to the international character of the church. Usually about 5 to 10 people from Britain and the USA come to church services on Sunday morning. has quite a big impact on the identity of the Evangelical Church in Mostar.S. 14 http://www.novimost.org/page4. This international character of the church gives the members the idea that they are part of a trans-national network. the way in which people pray. Somebody once said to me: ‘You will never find any Bosnian culture in the Evangelical Church in Mostar’. called Novi Most. Most of these people work in Mostar as missionaries for charity organisations. but also in the Brankovac church. The presence of people from Western Europe and the U. says for example:‘The vision of Novi Most International is to see young people in Bosnia Herzegovina bringing hope to their country by being instruments of positive transformation. This is especially the case in the West Mostar church.S. Most of them speak some Bosnian or Croatian.A. Another relatively big share of the make-up of the church consists of foreign aid workers. N° 9 Most men in the church are under 25 and in general men are a minority in most church activities. Usually these groups come during the summer to work for one of the charity organisations. Many of them have been in Bosnia for more than 5 years. or both of the parents come to church. come for a short period to Mostar. Almost all the songs are translated American worship songs. Most charity organisations provide humanitarian aid and combine this with evangelising activities. Most of the time only those come of whom one.

In many ways the presence of foreigners and the contacts with foreign churches pull a specific group of people towards the church. Some people in church call these people ‘rice Christians’. Some people were challenged in their motivations for coming to church. They show that young people from El Salvador who come from poor and powerless backgrounds find security and identity in international youth gangs. Often being outside of . Both Croats and Muslims are very hesitant to be baptised in the even those who have been involved with the church for a long period of time. Muslims see baptism as a really big step. The Pentecostal religious network offers a similar kind of security and identity as the youth gangs do. The leaders in church have been cautious to render too much material aid. During and in the first few years after the war. Those people that are not part of a network that gives them security and a place of belonging. For Bosnian Muslims and Croats being baptised in the Evangelical Church is seen as a betrayal of their ethnicity. People have told me that in the past this was more often the case.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 165 Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez discuss the importance of trans-national religious networks in an article on trans-national youth gangs and Pentecostal churches (Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez. Apart from material benefits another factor that pulls people to the church is the idea of belonging to a group that provides a secure environment is. 2003). It is not surprising therefore that so many refugees have some sort of relationship with the church. For some Muslim people it means breaking all the ties with the family. In Mostar the international character of the church also provides church members with a sense of belonging to a trans-national network. many people came to church because of material benefits. In this period many people stopped coming to church. The Pentecostal churches offer an alternative trans-national network to these people. In the last years the church has tried to make this group of rice Christians smaller. Poor people are more attracted to a group that provides some material aid than rich people. But the same is also the case for Bosnian Croats who join the Evangelical Church. are more easily attracted than people that already belong to such a network.

Just after I left Mostar a Bosnian Croat girl told her mother about her baptism. This brings material benefits. Religion is the most important marker of identity for both of these groups. who wore . There are various possible reasons why some people do not find enough protection in one the major groups. Ethnicity does not seem to play a big role in church. In the Evangelical Church people not only find a safe group. they also benefit from the presence of many international people.166 Teoloãki åasopis. People from their own ethnic group see them as traitors. Her mother was shocked by the news. For some groups. N° 9 networks and being poor go hand in hand. He was beaten up by Roman Catholics Christians. The insecure situation of Mostar creates the need for closely-knit groups that create a secure environment. Furthermore it provides people with a conviction of hope. This is the case for both Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. Another contradictory example is Mehmed. Sometimes it is because they live outside of town. This makes suffering in this world easier and gives people hope for a better future. For this reason many refugees are outsiders in Mostar. Most people in Mostar find this security in one of the two major ethnic groups. Many people go through difficult situations because of their choice to become part of the Evangelical Church. For these people the Evangelical Church has a lot to offer. They have a totally different ethnic background and just do not belong to one of the groups. But this would not do justice to the reality that I encountered in Mostar. it seems obvious. now become citizens of a heavenly kingdom. During the war in Mostar he was put in a prison camp by Bosnian Croats for the simple reason that he was a Muslim. It also makes people part of a larger international network. Religious identity is therefore of great importance. She had kept it a secret for a long time. For others the causes of marginality are less obvious. an old Bosnian Muslim man. People that were marginalized in Mostar. sometimes they don’t have the right connections. The Evangelical Church provides a safe environment for people from all ethnic groups. Some Mostarians cannot find security in either one of these groups. Nevertheless people choose to speak out for their faith. like refugees. From my analysis one could conclude that people exclusively come to church to improve their situation.

I wanted to know if it was real or fake unity and I wanted to know where this apparent unity came from if it happened to be real. people do have freedom to make personal choices. both churches have a very mixed group of attendants. As long as people do not reconcile on a local level. This role has a lot to do with the way people deal with matters of ethnicity in church. conflict resolution and peace building in BiH. but my primary focus is on a grassroots level. Most scholars focus on the importance of macro-political and macro-economical factors. Nevertheless. The first time I saw a group of evangelicals worship together in unity it fascinated me. After he was released from prison he decided to become a Christian and join the Evangelical Church. The main question of this article concerns the role of the reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. If the conflict between normal citizens is not resolved. I now want to analyse the way in which I encountered reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. I will first discuss the role of reconciliation in the church. In this prison he saw some kind of vision of Jesus. Therefore I will also describe the role of ethnicity during church activities and outside of church matter. This example shows that although sociological factors have a lot of impact. a repetition of the disastrous events remains an unlikely but realistic possibility. viable peace is impossible. Reconciliation Since my first encounter with evangelical Christians in BiH I have been puzzled by the fact that some people from different ethnic backgrounds seem to get along so well in this community. The west side . In this sense the church seems to take part in the division of Mostar.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 167 a picture of Jesus on their uniforms. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church The Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: One in East Mostar and one in West Mostar. Much has been written about strategies of reconciliation.

At the moment most people in church do not really seem to know why there are two buildings. The Christian symbol of the cross. These Muslims are living in a homogeneous Muslim environment and might feel unwelcome in a church where a lot of Christian symbolism is used. In an interview I asked Ivan. why the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two buildings. Strangely enough a rather large proportion of the people that come to the East side church lives in West Mostar. Nationalism and ethnic pride are not very much accepted in the Evangelical Church. About nationalism of the Bosnian Croats Ivan said: “Roman Catholic background people are more connected to being Croatian and are more proud of that and while actually coming to the Evangelical Church slowly you are losing that…I would say that it’s a process. ethnicity was supposed to play a minor role in church activities. but it is incomprehensible with the fact that so many people from West Mostar go to the church on the East side. The church in West Mostar has a strategy of evangelism that is designed for people who live in West Mostar. That means for Bosnian Croats and for those Bosnian Muslims who live in a predominantly Christian environment and are therefore used to Christian symbolism. for example is not used in this church.168 Teoloãki åasopis. People from both East and West Mostar both attend the services in this church. This sounds like a logical explanation for the two church buildings. you cannot change overnight and deny something that was implanted in you for such a long time. A person has to loose these things when he or she joins the church. In my research I mainly focused on the church in East Mostar. He explained to me that both churches have a different strategy of evangelism. I believe that the idea of having two church buildings originated from this difference in strategy. one of the leaders of the church in Mostar. . The church in East Mostar was started in 1997 to create a place where Bosnian Muslims from east Mostar feel welcome. In the same interview with Ivan he clearly states that from the beginning of the church. N° 9 church is attended by a slight majority of Bosnian Croats and the East side church has a slight majority of Bosnian Muslims. but that later the churches developed in a way that does not match with this strategy.

” It is not very surprising that ethnicity does not play a major role during church activities. He said that people have to get along in church irrespectively of their ethnic background. Ivan compared the situation in the Evangelical Church to the situation during the communist period. In that sense the church does play a role in the reconciliation process. reconciliation between ethnic groups is not part of the agenda of the church. For the church this is too much a political matter. This situation is a result from the fact that people are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 169 It’s a process. the life of Christ living in a person and slowly those things are dying. This is an unintended way of bringing ethnic groups closer together. The church does not play an active role in promoting reconciliation between ethnic groups in Mostar. During church activities Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats get along without paying attention to each other’s ethnic background. Of course the violent break up of Yugoslavia has made many people sceptic about the value of this supposed unity under communist rule. The foremost goal of the church is to reach people with the message of Jesus Christ. This is seen as a spiritual goal. The Evangelical Church tries to stay away from all political matters. During the communist period all ethnic groups in Yugoslavia lived together with the motto ‘Bratstvo i Jedinstvo’ (brotherhood and unity). This is an interesting comparison. Although ethnic groups mix in the Evangelical Church. but there are no activities organised with the aim of bringing ethnic groups closer together. For decennia communism seemed able to have relative success in uniting the different ethnic groups of Yugoslavia. People that come to church have relatively much contact with people from a different ethnic background. Reconciliation between ethnic groups does not have anything to do with this spiritual goal for most people in church. but the church has an impact on the way church people construct their ethnic identity. Of course reconciliation with God and forgiveness play a role in church. In the Evangelical Church avoiding suppressing issues of ethnicity creates a situation that is comparable to the situation during the communist regime. .

First of all I want to describe the role of ethnicity in the activities organised by the Evangelical Church. I have also interviewed church people about their ideas on ethnicity. In my research I have tried to find out if this unity that I encountered in church is also continued in the life of church people. He explained to me that some people outside the church thought that the Evangelical Church was a church for people from a mixed background.170 Teoloãki åasopis. In my research I have tried to find out more about what lies behind this apparent unity. . An important question that I will discuss is therefore: how far do the relationships between people from different ethnic background in the church stretch? It could be possible that the apparent unity does not stretch beyond the church door. Furthermore there often were some people from mixed ethnic background. There are few occasions in which Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats voluntarily come together. In my fieldwork I have observed people during church meetings. The pastor of the Brankovac church and his wife are both from a mixed Croat/Serb background. this phenomenon was more the cause than the object of my research. Usually these people were not just Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. Because of its clarity. people were present from various ethnic backgrounds. At almost all activities that I visited. The years of shared ideology could not prevent the harsh conflict that broke out in 1991. but also on other occasions that had not much to do with the church. The Role of Ethnicity in the Life of Church People There is no need for thorough research to come to the conclusion that the Evangelical Church is a place where ethnic groups mix in a way that is uncommon outside of church. but also Kosovo Albanians. N° 9 The next question is of course if this unity stretches beyond the walls of the church. Scepticism towards brotherhood and unity during communism has proved right. Gypsies and Serbs.

the church more and more defines one’s identity. Secondly. On most occasions one or two people from a different background were present. the pastor of the East side church explained to me that for many people ethnicity still plays a big role when they just start coming to church. the less the importance of ethnicity. but it was not like on most other church-related activities. It therefore was a solid group and it was hard for outsiders to become part of that group. but they did not have a central role during the meetings. Perhaps non-Croats did not feel welcome because it is such a homogeneous group of Bosnian Croats. ethnicity played a minor role. This determines the majority of their relationships. organised several years ago by an American missionary among Bosnian Croatian children. but that they just did not have so much contact with them. be- . It was a topic that was not spoken about much. As I said earlier ethnicity does not play a foremost role during church activities. Sometimes it caused a lot of confusion when I tried to find out what a person’s ethnic background was. People are in the first place evangelical Christian and not Bosnian Muslim. The longer they are evangelical Christian. In the interviews I had with some of the young people who come to these worship meetings they all told me that they had no problems with Bosnian Muslims. Of course sometimes people for whom ethnicity is an important issue came to church activities. They all live in West Mostar and go to Catholic schools. For all those who had a leading position in the church. Marco. Almost all the people that came to the worship meetings got involved with evangelical Christianity through this project. Most of them do not go to Sunday services in the Evangelical Church. As one becomes part of the church. The Wednesday night worship meetings where almost only visited by Bosnian Croats. because many people didn’t know to which group others belonged. First of all these meetings were always held in West Mostar and therefore all the people that came lived in West Mostar. Bosnian Croat or Albanian. There is one church related activity that is not attended by a mixed group of people. Ethnicity is part of the old identity.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 171 During meetings it usually took me a while to find out people’s ethnic background. the worship group had evolved out of an evangelism project. There are several factors that explain this.

The worship group is exceptional because it is predominantly visited by Bosnian Croats. They wanted to get more children from West Mostar involved and therefore moved to a new location close to the former frontline. To get a more complete picture of people’s lives. they pray with each other and for one another. They go for coffee with one another and help each other with practical matters. the more he or she becomes part of a new network of people. More and more 15 During my stay Novi Most moved to a new location in Mostar. On the one hand it became clear to me that on the long term people build relationships in church that go beyond church matters. People get along with one another in church like nothing happened in the past. During my research this pattern began to change. They actively try to get more Bosnian Croatian children involved and more children from the West Mostar schools. The longer a person is part of the church. .172 Teoloãki åasopis. They mainly worked with Bosnian Muslims and refugees. Before their club building had been in East Mostar. People become friends with other people they meet in church activities. People from different groups talk with each other. In many ways this was a difficult task. Ethnicity does not seem to play a significant role in these meetings. This is not enough to participate in the lives of all church people. Outside of church activities I met only a small group of people frequently and this group consisted mainly of young people. Like I said. Some of them also got more involved with Novi Most. an evangelical youth organisation in Mostar15 They start to build stronger relationships with other people that are involved in the Evangelical Church and this automatically means that they also develop more relationships with people from other ethnic backgrounds. I also had to observe and be part of people’s life outside of church affairs. most activities are visited by an ethnically mixed group of people. The next important question is how far this apparent peaceful coexistence stretches. One of the young people from this group started to come to church weekly and two others started to come once in a while. I only spent four months in Mostar. N° 9 cause they join their families to the mass.

The church does not have much impact on these relationships. people also stay part of other social networks. I found that in many cases evangelical Christians stay attached to their ethnic group outside of church activities. It is not surprising that most of the family members belong to the same ethnic group. She helps out with the youth work. In contrast to the previous example of Amela. Generally speaking the ethnic unification is not the same outside of church affairs as it is during church activities. Some people. Nevertheless it is striking that also the network of evangelical Bosnian Muslims that live in the Croatian part of Mostar. In Mostar this is almost unavoidable due to the all-embracing division of the city. Most of them had been friends for a long time and in many cases there was some kind of blood-tie. One evening I was on a birthday party of Amela. Dijana has a group of friends from a very . have become part of a very diverse social network. Her friends are mainly people from church. Family relationships are for many Bosnians of great importance. it is very difficult to build and maintain relationships with someone who lives on the other side of town. However. Except from some British and Americans. a girl from a Bosnian Muslim family. For a person who lives in West Mostar and attends a school or works in this part of town. A good example is Dijana. all guests were Bosnian Muslims. They maintain strong relationships with other people in their ethnic group who are not part of the Evangelical Church. a Bosnian Croatian girl who comes to Sunday services in the Brankovac church. Unintentionally everyone becomes part of the division and reproduces it. who have been going to church for a long time. On her birthday party I did not see any Bosnian Croats. on the long term relationships will be built in the church that have an impact on people’s whole lives and also their relationships. Outside church affairs people maintain strong relationships with people from their own ethnic group. Almost every time I met her she was hanging out with other young people from church. predominantly consists of other Bosnian Muslims.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 173 relationships are being built of mutual dependency. She has lived most of her life in West Mostar and has been going to the Evangelical Church since her early childhood. However.

Amir is an 18 year old Bosnian Muslim. Many organisations in Mostar attempt to create spaces where Bosnian Muslims and . despite his anger. One day I met Amir and he looked like he had been in a fight. About a year ago he has been baptised in the Evangelical Church and ever since he has been very much involved in church matters. Sometimes it becomes painfully clear that ethnicity still plays an important role in people’s lives. As far as I know. Then the group started to beat him up because they knew he was a Bosnian Muslim. Much of the division along ethnic lines that characterises present-day Mostar and BiH is not present in the Evangelical Church. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The following anecdote shows this. The situation in the Evangelical Church differs in many ways from the situation in other social groups. This example shows how hard it is to avoid the conflict in Mostar. is a small part of the post-war reconciliation process in the whole of Mostar and of BiH. Integration of ethnic groups is one of the most important. In many ways this process of integration seems to be happening in the Evangelical Church. also in the lives of evangelical Christians. N° 9 diverse ethnic background. but also difficult objectives of most peace building organisations. which he did not have. Amir was of course not able to defend himself against a whole group of men. A youth leader from the Evangelical Church spoke to him about how he should try to forgive the people that beat him up. Several weeks after this event Amir was still scared to go to West Mostar. He did not want to tell his name and then they asked for his identification card.174 Teoloãki åasopis. where he is often the only Bosnian Muslim among Bosnian Croats. and his relationship with Bosnian Croat friends has not changed. Young people grow up with the division and sooner or later it will affect them in some way. No one can completely avoid it. The contrasting examples of Amela and Dijana show that it is very difficult to draw general conclusions about the unifying effect of the church. when he was walking around in West Mostar. He also goes to Wednesday night worship meetings. He loves going to these worship meetings. He told me that the previous night. Amir never took revenge. a group of Bosnian Croats had come up to him and had asked him for his name.

their lives and their social networks. This has an effect on people’s ideas about ethnicity and about matters concerning reconciliation. In church people are expected to start a new life with Jesus irrespective of their ethnic background. although it is not one of it’s objectives. People are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in the process of becoming part of the Evangelical Church. In many ways the . The division of Mostar has a lot of impact on people. Therefore ethnicity is not to have an important role during church activities. the statue that was to symbolize unity was destroyed by vandals. but it does influence behaviour. Outside of church activities the radical change of people’s lives appears often far more gradual. However outside of church activities ethnicity often continues to play an important role in the life of evangelical Christians in Mostar. but evangelical. Conclusion Shortly after the celebration of erection of the statue of Bruce Lee in Mostar. Over time this has an effect on people’s lives. This is also the case for church people. This is mostly also a gradual process. At the same time there is also a change in convictions. In the Evangelical Church this is already the case for several years.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 175 Bosnian Croats can get in contact with each other. outside of church matters this integration appears to be less strong. So although in church people from different ethnic groups seem very much integrated. This does of course not mean that they always will. In fact reconciliation does not play an active role in the church. The more a person becomes part of the Evangelical Church the more his or her social environment changes. What is left now is the empty pedestal. Their new identity is neither Muslim nor Croat. People change their moral standards and their ideas about forgiveness in the process of becoming an evangelical Christian. In the Evangelical Church people are called to forgive each other. The primary objective of the church is to spread their message of Jesus Christ and most of it’s activities are focussed on this.

Almost none of the people that I studied during my fieldwork fit into the main categories in Mostar. Unintended Reconciliation The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for close-knit communities. Being part of the evangelical community is therefore of crucial importance for them. People who neither adhere to the catholic nor to the Islamic faith are in a comparable marginalised position. One is tempted to become pessimistic when one is confronted with present-day Mostar. In fact ethnicity in general is a subject that seems to be avoided in church. Ethnic differences do not play an important role in the church. In this final paragraph I will draw some conclusions. Some pessimists would say that reconciliation is not possible at all. It is a monument for all the fruitless efforts to unify Mostar. Rebuilding Mostar is a slow and laborious project.176 Teoloãki åasopis. When a person becomes part of the Evangelical . In this article I have discussed the role of reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The result is that the Evangelical Church in Mostar consists of people from various ethnic backgrounds. I have tried to write about one of the small sections of society in which there is some reason for hope. In the Evangelical Church in Mostar some cautious steps towards reconciliation are being made. But this is only a very small community and there are reservations to be made about the way in which reconciliation is established in the Evangelical Church. Belonging to a group offers human security in the precarious circumstances of Mostar. When people join the church. It is the only religious group in Mostar that is ethnically mixed. In a town where the division between ethnic groups determines nearly everything. N° 9 empty pedestal is a symbol in itself. the evangelical community defines their new identity. this is a striking phenomenon. For those people church offers a local community. a trans-national network to belong to and material aid. The main reason for this is that they all belong to the Evangelical Church in some way or another. This means that they are not part of one of the main religious groups and it is religion that for most people defines their ethnic identity.

Many of these efforts are fruitless. By joining the Evangelical Church one becomes a citizen of a heavenly kingdom. First of all they find a strong community.The first objective of the church is to reach people with its message about Jesus. Reconciliation is too much a political issue and the church does not want to be involved in political matters. The people who come to church have common interests in going to church. outside of church activities ethnicity does play a role in the life of evangelical Christians. would be a premature conclusion that the reconciliation process does not play any role in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. yet in a more unplanned way. Many of the people . Reconciliation is a process that needs a lot of time. This makes integration a very difficult objective. One of the reasons for this is that it is not easy to find matters of common interest. A safe environment is created for people from all different ethnic groups by largely avoiding issues concerning ethnicity. In this way prejudices can be overcome and people can start building relationships with people from other groups. They benefit from coming to church in various ways. The church does not have any strategies to reconcile people from different ethnic groups. Building bridges across the gap between Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats does not happen overnight. This ethnic mix is possible because issues of ethnicity are intentionally avoided. However. In Mostar much effort is put into creating places where Muslims and Croats can meet. The intended role of reconciliation might be minimal but in the Evangelical Church reconciliation between people does take place. Reconciliation is not one of the main objectives of the Evangelical Church. People from different ethnic background come together.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 177 Church he is expected to replace some of his ethnic identity by an evangelical Christian identity. People’s social life is often strongly influenced by one’s ethnic background. but in order to worship their God. not with the objective of overcoming the division that is so present in Mostar.However. The conflict in Mostar has created two groups that have no urgent need to interact. A Bosnian Muslim can live his whole life in East Mostar and a Bosnian Croat has no need to go to East Mostar.

Maybe this will slowly change in the future when stronger relationships are being built among church people. From this perspective it may seem like people join the church in a very calculating way. Church provides a local community and furthermore. people’s convictions change. N° 9 who come to church would otherwise be marginalised. Many of them do not fit automatically in one of the main groups in Mostar. Being part of a network offers people very practical opportunities. When a person joins a religious group this has an effect on his personal system of meaning making. Being part of such a community gives otherwise marginalised people a strong sense of belonging. Thirdly. So far the effect of the church on the rest of Mostar is relatively small. It is especially attractive for those people who are in need of a strong community. The presence of foreign aid workers in church is something church people often benefit from in a direct way. This explains the ethnic diversity in church. These benefits attract people from all different ethnic background. People are often unaware of the social conditions that have an impact on the choices they make. The integration of ethnic groups in the church is an unintended spin-off effect of the church. I do not think that is the case. the church is part of a trans-national network. Secondly people benefit in material ways from being part of the church. However this is still a slow process and the integration does not stretch far beyond church activities. Often people return to their own ethnic groups outside of church matters. Maybe reconciliation should become an intentional objective for the church. Many of the people in church come from a poor and powerless background. material aid or a change of convictions and these people are present in every ethnic group in Mostar.178 Teoloãki åasopis. I defined religion as part of the total framework of systems of meaning making. Evangelical Christianity gives people very clear goals in life and it gives people hope for a better future. By becoming part of the church they acquire a place in a strong network. This integration creates good ground for reconciliation. However . People start to build relationships with people from different ethnic backgrounds. in the process of becoming part of a church.

Nationalist Partition and International Intervention London: Hurst and Company. 1999 Certainty: Ethnic Violence in the Era of Globalization. Boissevain. (ed. . Bax. M. 305-324. P. B.) 1994. S. The Anthropology of Europe. 41-56. and Religious Identities London: Routledge. G. 1995 Medjugorje: Religion Politics. Rethinking National. Globalization and Identity Oxford: Blackwell. Bibliography Appadurai.L. A. P. (eds. and Geschiere P. Berger. Baumann. 1994 Towards an Anthropology of European Communities. In: Meyer. Bose. and Violence in Rural Bosnia Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij. 1966 The social Construction of Reality New York: Anchor Books. pp.L.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 179 in some ways it could serve as a model for many organisations who try to reconcile people in Mostar. Th. Oxford: Berg. Ethnic. 1967 The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion New York: Doubleday. and Luckmann. A. In: Goddard. J.). V. 1999 The Multicultural Riddle. 2002 Bosnia after Dayton. pp. Berger.

Lambek. Chandler. 1995 Being Muslim the Bosnian way. Vásquez. . and Marie Friedmann Marquardt 2003 Globalizing the Sacred. York: Basic Books. Kelly. N° 9 Bringa. 1995 The protean self: human resilience in an age of fragmentation. T. (ed. (1995). G. Zaitchik. 1995 Miracle in Mostar Oxford: Lion Publishing. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Eriksen. 2000 Bosnia. Identity and Community in a Central Bosnian Village. H.) 2002 A Reader in the Anthropology of Religion Malden/Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. D. R. L. 2006 Mostar’s little dragon. 2002 Ethnicity and Nationalism London: Pluto Press. J. Faking Democracy after Dayton London: Pluto Press.180 Teoloãki åasopis. T. Manuel A. A. and Sheppard. April 2006. M.com/archives/2006/04/01/mostars-littledragon. Lifton. Religion across the Americas London: Rutgers University Press. URL:http://reason.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 181 .

182 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 PREGLEDNI RADOVI .

” God made but is utterly different from his creation.03.2010 Pregledni Ålanak An Orthodox World View For Life In The 21 .. Even our recognition of our limitations in speaking of him can only be . Orthodoxy confesses. and all vocations. God is and forever will remain beyond us— incomprehensible. One of the renowned Russian Orthodox leaders of the past recognized this Orthodox potential: Father Alexander Yelchaninov said. or anything else.C e n t u r y In this 21st century. And within it. All else came into being only by his creative activity. and ineffable. Yelchaninov recognized that Orthodoxy’s worldview includes the whole of creation. Let us now consider briefly your Orthodox “Christian outlook” (to borrow Fr. but nothing in that creation is on a continuum with him: God is not the “ultimate” member in a chain of being. in the words of the Nicene Creed. incomparable. Jim Payton 183 UDK 281. that God Almighty is “Maker of heaven and earth.03. with the collapse of Communist restrictions and the opportunity to live as God’s faithful in freedom. society.. all matters are seen in their spiritual dimensions and significance. Yelchaninov’s designation). thought. In himself.”1 Fr. you Orthodox—here in Serbia and in other Eastern European countries—have a new opportunity to influence your society with your rich heritage. non-religious matters: The ‘Christian outlook’ is one whole.2010 Prihvañeno: 30. and of all things visible and invisible. education.. “There are no commonplace. This is not so only because we are finite: it is because he is transcendent.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dr.96"20" Primljeno: 25.

8 to bring out the fullness of its potential to the glory of God.184 Teoloãki åasopis.2 And yet. in philosophical terminology. and future in the God who made and sustained it. as St. who enjoyed a special place in the creation. life. Gregory Palamas has reminded us. But it still had to develop. Gregory of Nyssa and St. It was “very good.7 As God’s image-bearers. in his energies. the material and the immaterial.” as God pronounced it at the end of his creative work. God is nearer to his creation than we can grasp. to God’s praise. God is beyond even our awareness that he is beyond us. that Creator nevertheless was the one in whom the entire creation “lives. absolutely immanent. Orthodoxy—fol- . is utterly transcendent is. they were even more greatly privileged to bear the image of God. offering all the wonders of creation.”4 God did not make the creation self-sustaining: it could have no life in itself. God made human beings as the only creatures who would share equally in both the realms of creation—in the words of the Nicene Creed. The one who. In stark contrast to ancient Greek philosophy’s endorsement of the eternally static and unchanging as the ultimate good. moves. Composed of body and soul. and God had built into all creation the potential with which it should develop. John of Damascus taught. in his essence.3 While what he created was utterly different from the Creator. “the visible and the invisible”. This was true for all of creation. while human beings were greatly privileged to be thus the only microcosm of all the rest of creation.9 since it was complete and harmonious. humans were to manifest the greatness of God’s creation by bringing to light and fruition all that God had prepared the creation to become. N° 9 couched in thoughts and terms derived from our created human intellectual capacities. it was true also for humanity. human beings participated in both realms.6 As both St. in its future development. they were positioned at the intersection of everything else in creation and called to work with that creation. under the leadership of his human vice-regents. but only in him. human beings were placed in the Garden of Eden. and has its being. Humanity was to serve as priests. Orthodoxy stresses that God made the creation dynamic. By using the gifts God had given them as his image-bearers.5 The cosmos only had meaning.

God promised our fallen first parents that he would send. . Maximos Confessor10—urges that the “ultimate good” for creation is its God-given dynamism. influence. Seeking the most of our brief life. This task would not be completed in only a few days or years: the God who had made all things also created time. Dependent on him—as was all of the rest of creation—humanity was to deepen its commitment to him in lives of joy. loving. depending thus on what had no life in itself.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 185 lowing the teaching of St.15 Eventually. In so doing. and the environment with little thought for its development and more for our advantage (in power. all to the glory of the Creator. and took their descendants with them. and humanity was to lead it progressively in that development. and love: created in the divine image. and stewardly manner with everything else in creation. sought a short-cut to that likeness: heeding the suggestion of the tempter. and we have filled our mouths with sand. they looked to the creation rather than to the Creator for what they needed. we have misused the rest of creation for our own benefit—in government. Adam and Eve. service. becoming more deeply committed to their God and increasingly aware of his greatness and his love toward his creation.11 But our first parents. as one of their descendants.14 The garden has become a desert. in which everything is always in process of change and development. rather than drawing near to the One for whose fellowship we were created but whose eternal existence is beyond our comprehension. or possessions). the second person of the Trinity. down through history—were to work in a gentle. they were to acquire the divine likeness as they served and communed with God. a champion who would overcome evil. human beings would themselves develop. he fulfilled that promise and sent not only a human son. our first parents—and their descendants.12 In so doing. bringing out all its latent possibilities. they fell into death. but the divine one. we have been attracted by what serves our fleeting temporal existence. The creation should develop over time. society.16 God’s Son. Basil the Great and St. they tried to become like God by eating the forbidden fruit. In dependence on and faithful communion with God. intending it to unfold into the sweep of subsequent history.13 Through subsequent human history.

in order to break its power over others. as the Orthodox liturgist Fr. to live up to humanity’s original calling—every day.186 Teoloãki åasopis. John Chrysostom long ago spoke about this as “the liturgy after the liturgy. Perhaps you who are Orthodox already recognize all I will say. in all they do. Much more could be said in sketching out the riches of an Orthodox worldview. since in the incarnation God established a bridge between himself as Creator and his creation. Orthodox worship rightly understood impels the faithful to vigorous Christian action in the world. though: it offered hope for all of creation.”17 The incarnation was not only a rescue operation for fallen human beings.19 St. since I have not found these matters discussed anywhere in the Orthodox literature available to me. on this earth. The opportunities of serving him in this life are as unlimited as the vastness of creation and its manifold potential. But. if so. Christ yielded to what had no power over him. and “the Word became flesh. I claim no originality for it: I am only trying to think with . but I trust that what we have considered is sufficient to indicate its broad contours. in his resurrection. the divine Son became all that the first man was called to be—faithful to God and devoted to him through all his life. If any of this strikes you as new. and the Eucharist. Let me now briefly suggest three implications of this worldview for life in the 21st century.” In Jesus Christ human beings are freed and enabled. The resurrected Christ summons us to enter into the fullness of our humanity in this life. We are called anew to the task given our first parents: we are to give ourselves freely and fully to work in and develop all of creation—a creation now redeemed in Jesus Christ20—to God’s glory. in this life and on this earth. its liturgy. Alexander Schmemann urges. I can only beg your indulgence. God—who alone has life in himself—broke the stranglehold of death on humanity. N° 9 took humanity unto himself in the incarnation.18 All this Orthodoxy celebrates in the gathering of the church. death. he overcame humanity’s enemies—sin. and the devil—to free us to live unto God in the present life. in coming as fully human. In uniting humanity and deity. in taking upon himself the death Adam had brought into the world.

in every day. all to God’s glory. from an Orthodox perspective.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 187 you through the implications of your worldview for life in the present day. science. God’s creation and his calling on our lives encourage us to engage in such exploration. His dynamic creation has built into it all the possibilities that God intends for it. music. As we live. or whatever—are the exploration and elucidation of what God placed within the creation. He has set us free to resume our human task of developing culture. . Whatever humankind may manage to develop. an inescapable responsibility in faithfully learning. he remains ever transcendent. medicine. In the first place. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would encourage all the faithful to develop their potential for God’s service as his image-bearers and vice-regents. politics. In all our labors and learning. consequently. There is nothing—no realm of scholarship. Secondly. business. consequently. We examine what we now know of that creation and seek ways to develop both our knowledge and that creation further. government. all that can be studied comes from God’s creative activity. but engaging in the work of ongoing explorations and reflections which will enhance what we may learn about the cosmos. and in all places. as we learn (whether in school or by experience). an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would embrace the wide diversity of God’s manifold creation. the sciences. Thirdly. Even so. needs to be studied and taught as his. technology. depends on him—and. no function of interpersonal society—which is secular. All comes from him. sport. The privilege of serving the resurrected Christ is not restricted to priests and monks: human beings can serve him in all legitimate occupations. literature. no section of life. we must honor both God’s essence and his energies. art. economics. we will be working with the still rich potential God built into the “all things visible and invisible” which he created. Responsible life before God implies not only passing on what has already been learned. we are always encountering the divine energies: keeping him in mind is. and he calls his image-bearers to develop that creation to its full potential. Whatever advances we or others may achieve in any field of endeavor—in culture. redeemed and restored in Christ.

as chemists or homemakers. taking their place in our human task of unfolding the riches of that creation to the praise of its Creator. from an Orthodox perspective. Thus. An Orthodox worldview has the potential to invigorate and stimulate the faithful today to become all God has made them to be. Thank you. N° 9 and everything else out of what God had prepared his magnificent creation to become. we can honor Christ in all areas of life. Human beings now can honor Christ the Creator and Redeemer by becoming fully all he has gifted them to be—as historians or electricians. as leaders in society or as followers.188 Teoloãki åasopis. I pray this will transpire among the Orthodox faithful here in Serbia in the 21st century. as medical researchers or politicians. . as political scientists or factory workers.

2:3. De variis difficilibus locis. 1988). John the Theologian: “All things came into being through him [the Logos].19. The Triads. 1974). trans. and without him not one thing came into being that has come into being. Maximos Confessor all made wide use of it. 1974). In him was life (John l:3-4a). 206-207. Fedotov. Maximos Confessor. on the basis of Genesis 1:26-27. Gregory Palamas. New York: St.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 189 NOTES 1.. 3. and St. 5. 11-14. 256. Basil the Great. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. St. A Treasury of Russian Spirituality (Fadux: Btichervertriebsansalt. 2d ed. 2. Fr. John of Damascus. 6. St. St. 4. and St. Acts 17:28. Cf the declaration of St. Gregory Palamas had occasion to emphasize it. St. and Oratio 45:7. This understanding of humanity is presented by St. 16) and St. John of Damascus (The Orthodox Faith 2:12) urged this. 7. A Study of Gregory Palamas. Alexander Yelchaninov. George Lawrence (Crestwood. see also the somewhat broader treatment in his Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York: Fordham University Press. cf. . Gregory the Theologian. St.8. 1:3. the treatment in John Meyendorff. Gregory of Nyssa. as cited in George P. during the course of the Hesychast controversy. Gregory of Nyssa (De Opificio Hominis. The essence/energies distinction was common among the ancient Greek fathers: St. Oratio 38: 11. The Orthodox Faith 2:12.

According to St. 60. She took of its fruit and ate. ‘Let us make humankind in our image. 9. among the Greek fathers. ‘Let us make humankind in our image. ‘You will not die: for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God’”. “The first man brought in universal death” (Catechesis 13:2). and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth. who was with her. “Then God said. but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat.’ So God created humankind in his image. in the same vein. male and female he created them. “God saw everything that he had made. 43). ‘Be fruitful and multiply. St.. and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth’” (Genesis 1:26-28). “Then God said. the discussion in John Meyendorff. 13. and over the cattle. God blessed them and God said to them. Anastasius of Sinai said. but likeness was understood to be the goal toward which human beings were to develop. 2 above). St. it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). 11. 132-134. 3:4-6). and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea. image was understood as given in creation. “We receive mortality from him [Adam]” (Questions and Answers. for in the day that you eat of it you shall die’”.. ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden. “But the serpent said to the woman. according to our likeness’” (Genesis 1:26). Byzantine Theology (as in n. in the image of God he created them. Basil the Great taught this in his Hexaemeron. and fill the earth and subdue it.190 Teoloãki åasopis... and over all the wild animals of the earth. Maximos Confessor agrees with these senti- . Ch. 10. cf. and she also gave some to her husband.. Cyril of Jerusalem. St. and he ate" (Genesis 2:16-17. “And the Lord God commanded the man. Maximos Confessor argued it in Adversus Thallassium. N° 9 8. according to our likeness. Homily 5.. and over the birds of the air. 12. and indeed.

Theodore of Mopsuestia. Paul wrote that “When the fullness of time had come. rightly understood. would lead to neglect of contemporary issues and problems: cf. St. 113. New York: St. Cyril of Alexandria. 134). John Chrysostom. Theophylact of Ohrid. In response to what had transpired. 96-107. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. and you will strike his heel” (Genesis 3:15).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 191 ments (cf. John 1:14. 100. specifically citing St. The above summarizes the views of St. St. cf. his argument at 21. his Quaestiones ad Thalassium). 19. Irenaeus. God sent his Son. as do virtually all the Greek fathers. Gregory the Theologian. 18. “I will put enmity between you [the serpent]and the woman. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Maximos Confessor. . St. he repeatedly urges that Orthodox worship should drive the faithful out into the world to engage in service (e. his Byzantium and the Rise of Russia: A Study of Byzantino-Russian Relations in the Fourteenth Century (Crestwood. 123. In his Byzantine Theology (as in n.. 1973). 15. As well. and between your offspring and hers. John Meyendorff summarizes the consensus of the ancient Greek fathers and subsequent Byzantine Orthodox leaders on these points. Fr. he will strike your head. born of a woman” (Galatians 4:4). 14. 17. and virtually all the ancient Greek fathers on the accomplishment of redemption by the incarnate Son of God. Schmemann frequently deals with worldview issues as he treats Orthodox worship and sacraments in his For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy (Crestwood. St. 1989). and St. 7 above).g. New Jersey: St. John Meyendorff has argued that nothing in Orthodoxy. Theodoret of Cyprus. God declared. 16. Gregory Palamas (144-145). in this work.

. New Jersey: St. Gregory the Theologian. Lossky cites the statement by St.192 Teoloãki åasopis. “A few drops of blood make the universe whole again” (patristic source not given). Vladimir Lossky urges. 1978). Vladimir’s Seminary Press. which extends across the entire cosmos” (114). in confirmation of this. “Redemption is a wondrous reality. N° 9 In his Orthodox Theology: An Introduction (Crestwood.

to interpret the text (with respect to the selected prominent commentaries) and to understand areas and principles of its implications.which. ecclesiological and missiological) background . the typical summary statement. Definition of the Passage The Acts 15:22-29 passage is the integral part of .what I would entitled .” recommended by Charles Van Engen. The purpose of the exegesis of Acts 15:22-29 is to listen the text itself . cultural. . 10. This is obvious. Likewise. geographical. is opening up a new topic (controversial question related to circumcision that ruined Jewish/Gentile Christian relationship) . by which Luke has ended his report of the First Missionary Journey.in the light of both its immediate and broad biblical context and its multifaceted (historical. the introductory sentence of the Second Missionary Journey. in this case.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dimitrije Popadiñ 193 UDK 22. The Acts 15:22-29 passage immediately follows the concluding speech of James (15:13-21). By the linking word 1 See Van Engen 1998. 1 1.08 Twelve Steps In The Exegesis Of The Acts 15:22-29 The exegetical method utilized in this study is the “Twelve Steps in the Exegesis of a Paragraph.the Jerusalem Council event: Acts 15:1-35. theological.that followed the Acts 14:28. since Acts 15:1 is a typical introductory sentence .by which Luke has wrapped it up the positive outcome of the decision of the Jerusalem Council that is followed by Acts 15:36. Acts 15:35 is the typical summary statement .

the prologue is the preparation for the teaching and the ministry of Jesus. and in terms of the grater potential to geographically spread away from the center (Jerusalem). Acts 15:1-35) as the preparation for the new level of the cross-cultural mission. could be considered as a preparation for Acts (and the Acts as the preparation for the mission of the Church. Within the Acts. again.” (29). 23) and by the other “border-passage-verse.versus Acts alone . the Acts 15: is the preparation for the new level of the cross cultural mission both in terms of the more explicit definition of the content of the message (the gospel is “free” from “burdens” of the Jewish culture).194 Teoloãki åasopis. Textual Variation The most significant textual variation of the Acts 15:22-29 passage has to do with the phrase: kai tou pniktou (“and what is stran- . Gospel of Luke. 2. but it is a passage with its own identity: it carries the contents of the conclusion of the Jerusalem Council. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Luke/Acts Acts 15:22-29 passage has to be considered in its relationship with Luke/Acts . as a whole. Accordingly.both. In this perspective. Thus. the prologue is the preparation for the coming of the Spirit. which is the preparation for His ascension. which is the preparation for mission. the preparation for His dead and resurrection.since it is part of Luke’s one -though two volumes . which could be seen as the preparation for the Second Coming of Christ). which is. I can recognize this passage (with its immediate context. 3. Within the gospel of Luke. the writer is “leaving” the Jerusalem Council . as the geographical place (verse 30 follows the events in Antioch) and as the event (the meeting of the apostles and the church) by citing the letter-conclusion of the Council.work. Acts 15:22-29 is the sequence of the Acts 15:1-35. N° 9 “Then” (22) the writer begin to presents the corporate decision of the Council and the action taken by it (“chose… wrote a letter and sent…” 22.

This three-prohibitions ( 1. apparently contradictory act. Robert Tannehill explains that the reason for such. since it takes into the consideration Jewish feelings about the outward behavior of the 3 2 3 See Smith 1919. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Related Scriptures Simon Peter has learned a significant lessons (Lk 15:11-32 and Acts 10:1-48) which have undermined his ethnocentrism and help him to understand the non-legalistic nature of God’s message of salvation. and Tertullian in the early third century).’” This concern is build in the Jerusalem Decree (proposed by James. things sacrificed to idols. blood. things sacrificed to idols. 3. which has been omitted in Western text of the Codex Bezae (D) and the Harclean Syriac (apparatus). the controversial demand for the circumcision lied upon the Gentles. fornication) Apostolic Decree that is understood by its authorities as a ceremonial in nature. Even though the Jerusalem Council has made clear that the circumcision is not required for salvation (and Paul’s writing emphases the primacy of the circumcision of the hearth). 2. for example. is Paul’s compassion for the concern of the Jewish Christians that “as Gentiles become the majority within the church”. 11. a Jew). most probably because of the strict language of the Leviticus 17 and 18.understood by the Western authorities as ethical in nature .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 195 gled”). we see Paul affirming Timothy’s circumcision. fornication) Apostolic Decree . Tannehill 1998. 2 4. Thus. . blood and 3. 2. However. things strangled.stands in contrast with the Egyptian or Alexandrian text found in the Codex Vaticanus (B). they “might then have to choose withdrawal into isolation or ‘apostasy from Moses. and its four -prohibitions (1. a special warning regarding the restriction of eating any manner of blood have needed to be enclosed with the final decision of the Jerusalem Council. he (as well as James in that regard) has considered being a “yoke” (10). (also confirmed by Irenaeus in the second. and 4. particularly 17:10. 191.

255. and to us” (verse 28). N° 9 growing community of Gentles. 5. “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit. . verse 7. (Given place. are not under the submission to the Jewish law . In short. 315. wherever the Church have had its regular meetings. and it is made by the “original” church established by Christ. and thus it is determined by them. regarding which “some critics claim that it is a literary composition by Luke himself. Furthermore. apostles and elders assembled for the meeting. which are now consisting the Church.) 6. Marshall 1983. the Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features and.196 Teoloãki åasopis.but they should only “abstain from sacrifices offered to idols and from blood and from animals strangled and from fornication:” (verse 29). verse 4. by accepting the Gospel of Grace. thus.especially to the rite of circumcision . versus 12 and 22). I am impressed by the careful construction of the letter. The decision is an authoritative one since it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. I will not discuss this issue.” and there is no parallel for such a phrase. The Major Theme of Acts 15:22-29 The Church in Jerusalem has made an authoritative decision that the Gentiles. Geographical and Historical Setting The Jerusalem Council took place in the Church in Jerusalem. Literal Features of the Acts 15:22-29 The words. you don’t have to circumsize. The time of the Jerusalem Council falls in between the First and the Second Missionary Journeys.” 4 5 7. and the whole congregation was present. 4 5 Bruce 1983. (Paul and Barnabas arrived in Jerusalem. by which Luke is wrapping up the decision of the Council. where His apostles are the ministers and from where the gospel was spread all over. “emphasize the church’s role as the vehicle of the Spirit.

one which relates to the expansion of the Christian faith cross-culturally. There are two categories of the people: the senders of the letter. “to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. Missiological contribution of this passage is that clarifies the church’s understanding of the cross-cultural characteristic of the Gospel (because it is supra-cul- . Ecclesiological. • The only exceptions has to do with the idols. in particular. • We are confirming Paul and Barnabas (25. elders and the congregation and the way of solving the church’s controversies e. Pneumatological. 26) [and their opinion].Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 197 8. nd rd 10. in that reveals the direct involvement of the Holy Spirit in the Church’s leadership and the decision making in general and. • In that. “who were leaders among the brethren” . elders . ecclesiological and missiological contribution of the passage are obvious. apostles. • We are sending you our elders. The “Outline” of the Theme of Acts 15:22-29 I see the “outline” of the support of the main theme of Acts 15:22-29 as following: • The Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features • The Jews that “upset your souls” (24) were not our representatives.g.” (verse 23). The Main Theological Concept of Acts 15:22-29 The pneumatological.including Judah (who is called Barsabas) and Silas. Judah and Silas (27). we are in agreement with the Holy Spirit (28).and the whole [Jerusalem] church. and the recipients. The People Involved in Acts 15:22-29 All of the people mentioned in this passage are listed in the 22 and the 23 verse. to confirmed that. 9. together with the Paul and Barnabas (verse 22). in that discloses organization of the early Church in terms of the role of the apostles. blood and fornication (29). by a council.

to know how to act when faced with the controversy. N° 9 tural in nature) and enables it to carry out the Great Commission with authenticity. Without an active participation (or. This is important. Gathered for the sake of Christ. 11. If authentic . task-oriented and delegating church. This passage is a lighthouse to a church at any time and any place. since there was no authorization. it will be a yoke that troubles peoples’ souls more then it helps.g. ecclesiological and missiological implications. Conclusions in the Light of the Prominent Commentaries Verse 22. Acts 15:22-29 has theological. and it will consequently become a humane institution. Furthermore. submitted to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. better: leadership) of the Holy Spirit.198 Teoloãki åasopis. the Council “carefully dissociated the Jerusalem church from those of their number who had made the demand contained in 15:1. In its letter. Harrison 1986.” Verse 24. The church in Jerusalem was well-organized.e. an organization that uses the means and methods of human secular societies. 34.” 6 7 6 7 Kurnizgen 1966.it will be a blessing toward salvation to the recipients of the Gospel. Verse 23. with an open-minded discussion of all participants. . 12. the nature of the church would determine the nature of its mission. Implications Accordingly. “The decision of the Council is put down in writing. They acted decisively and they made a specific decisions regarding both what they decided about the controversy and how they would convey their decision. If institutionalized. the church would lose its God-given identity of being people of God. 253. Holy Spirit lead and inspired . a church would create a platform for a fulfillment of God’s will. The Church is a properly ordered community.

Gerhard A. 335.27. .Eerdmans Publishing Company. while the Holy Spirit functions as the chief authority to which the church and its leaders give their agreement. Grand Rapids: William B. but also confirm by word of mouth what it contained. Polhill 1992. New York: Herder and Herder. They would not only deliver the letter.” Verse 28. Krodel 1986. Grand Rapids: Academie Books Zondervan Publishing House. The leaders (apostles and elders) and the assembly (whole Jerusalem church) “are included in the pronoun us. 251. Harisson. Krodel.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 199 Verse 25 . Vol. The Council “made it abundantly clear that the men they had now agreed to choose…and send… did have their full approval and support. 1. F. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House. 8 9 10 Stott 1990. 1986 Acts: Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. Everett F. 1986 Interpreting Acts: The Expanding Church.” “Verse 29 lists the four provisions of the apostolic decree just as originally proposed by James (v. 1983 Commentary on the Book of the Acts. Josef 1966 The Acts of the Apostles. 20). 288.” 8 9 10 REFERENCES CITED Bruce. Kurnizgen.

David 1919 The Life and Letters of St. . 1990 The Spirit the Church and the World: The Message of Acts. Robert 1998 The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts A Literary Interpretation. Fuller Theological Seminary. John B. Polhill. New York: Doran. Vol 2.” MT 523 Course Description and Syllabus. N° 9 Marshall. 1992 The New American Commentary: Acts. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. Charles 1998 “The Holy Spirit and Mission in Luke/Acts. Tannehill. W.200 Teoloãki åasopis. Leicester. I. England: Inter-Varsity Press and Grand Rapids: William B. Van Engen. Smith. Howard 1983 The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary. Neshville: Broadman Press. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Mineapolis: Fortress Press. Paul. John R. Stott.

.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 201 Rezime U ovom ålanku autor predstavlja dvanaest koraka procesa egzegeze svetopisamskog teksta opisa Jerusalimskog sabora (Dela 15:22-29). i to u svom uæem i ãirem biblijskom kontekstu i u svetlu njegove viãeslojne (istorijske. tumaåenje teksta s osvrtom na odabrane priznate komentare. eklesioloãke i misioloãke) pozadine. teoloãke. i to prema uputima profesora Åarlsa Van Engena. Svrha egzegeze ovoga odlomka jeste „sluãanje“ samoga teksta. geografske. kulturne. i identifikovanje i razumevanje odreœenih oblasti i principa primene ovoga teksta.

202 STRUÅNI RAD .

Isusovi uåenici su znatiæeljno postavili svom uåitelju jedno vaæno pitanje: “ravi. teol. Meœutim. Kada su u pitanju uzroci bolesti. Prihvañeno: 01. æele odgovor na ovo pitanje kao i Hristovi uåenici u ono vreme. a i mnogi drugi.02.net ) Duhovni aspekti bolesti Biblijska perspektiva Rezime Pre oko dve hiljade godina Isus je prolazio sa svojim uåenicima pored jednog slepca. koji je bio slep od roœenja. Neki pokuãavaju da shvate smisao bolesti. zaãto dolazi do bolesti. ili njegovi roditelji pa se slep rodio?” (Jovan 9:1-3).03. danas. Meœutim. U ovom radu bih hteo prvo da kaæem neãto o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja. on. da li je moæda ta bolest samo rezultat ljudske nemarnosti za oåuvanjem sopstvenog zdravlja? Verujem da mnogi hriãñani. ljudi se i danas pitaju zaãto ih takav bol. Zato su i postavili takvo pitanje. Petar Piliñ UDK 234.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 203 Dipl. ko je zgreãio.2010 Hriãñanska etika i duãebriæniãtvo Pregledni ålanak Protestantski Teoloãki Fakultet u Novom Sadu Pastor Hriãñanske Baptistiåke Crkve u Novom Sadu ( pilicnip@nspoint. pitanja mogu biti postavljena na sledeñi naåin: da li je neko ljudsko biñe bolesno zbog posledice greha? Da li je to ljudsko biñe moæda bolesno zato ãto ga je Sotona hteo iskuãati kao Jova? Ili.23:616 Asistent . patnja ili kazna snalazi.predavaå za predmete Primljeno: 22. kada govorim o duhovnim aspektima bolesti æelim naglaãenije govoriti o postavci Isusa i njegovih .2010 Svetske religije. Oni su smatrali da je u pitanju bio greh.

Da bismo imali ãto jasniju sliku o bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja potrebno je analizirati nekoliko starozavetnih tekstova koji govore o takvim dogaœajima. Bog se brinuo za zdravlje svog naroda ali narod je trebao da mu bude posluãan. u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja.su bili isceljeni. i ako prigneã uho k zapovijestima njegovijem i uãåuvaã sve uredbe njegove. Bog je dao åoveku jedan uslov koji ñe mu sigurno obezbediti zdravlje. U Starom zavetu. Kljuåne reåi: Stari zavet. pogotovo za pripadnike izabranog naroda. i uåiniã ãto je pravo u oåima njegovijem. U knjizi Izlazak u petnaestom poglavlju u dvadesetãestom stihu. Avimelek je poslao svoje sluge . Pokajanje je bilo put ka ozdravljenju. zato ãto je On moj Spasitelj. æelim da vidim kako se Isus postavljao u takvim sluåajevima. ponovo zdravi. N° 9 uåenika prema bolestima. na prvom mestu o bolestima. lekar tvoj”. nakon ãto su se pokajali. Neki od njih. greh. Uåitelj i Gospod. Bolesni ljudi su morali da se pokaju i da mole Boga za oproãtenje da bi ozdravili. nijedne bolesti koju sam pustio na Misir neñu pustiti na tebe. jer sam ja Gospod. apostoli. Bolest je u Starom zavetu bila Boæija kazna za neposluãnost. Avram je govorio za svoju æenu Saru da mu je sestra. Isus Hristos. Novi zavet. 1. bolest. isceljenje. Bog je rekao svom narodu: “Ako dobro uzasluãaã glas Gospoda Boga svojega. reãenje i uteha u pogledu ljudskih bolesti kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja Bog je onaj koji daje zdravlje åoveku. demoni. Zato. 32:39).dogaœaj koji govori o Boæijoj kazni za Avimeleka i njegovom pomilovanju. ali takoœe i puãta bolest na åoveka (Pnz. i kako bi trebali i danas. æelim da vidim i kako su se Njegovi uåenici postavljali u sliånim situacijama. Postanak 20 . Smatram da u Njegovim i njihovim postavkama leæi smisao. Saznavãi za Saru. Åovek je u Boæijim rukama i niko i niãta ne moæe izbaviti åoveka iz njegovih ruku jer je Bog åovekov Stvoritelj. Pronaãao sam åetiri teksta koja ñu koristiti za ovu analizu.204 Teoloãki åasopis. Zatim.

Dakle. prvo trebao da se pokaje za uåinjeni greh/grehe. Bog je rekao Avimeleku u snu da je uåinio zlo jer je uzeo æenu koja ima muæa. u starozavetno doba. Boæiji åovek. Brojevi 12 . Ono ãto je bilo potrebno da bi Marija bila isceljena je . Inaåe. u ovom primeru Bog se smilovao na Avimeleka i dao mu uslov od åijeg je ispunjenja zavisio njegov. Oni su smatrali da Gospod ne govori samo preko Mojsija. Gospod je pozvao Mariju.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 205 da mu je dovedu za æenu. 2. bolest je i u ovom sluåaju bila kazna za greh. neposluãnost. Stari zavet nije baã poznat po milosti. a zatim je Mariji i Aronu rekao da su uåinili greh gunœajuñi protiv Mojsija kao njegovog proroka sa kojim on razgovara lice u lice. Trebao je da vrati Saru Avramu i da se Avram pomoli za njega jer je Avram prorok. Aron se pokajao i zamolio Mojsija da moli Boga za Marijino isceljenje. ko bude posluãan biñe blagosloven. pomolio se za Marijino isceljenje i Bog mu je rekao da ñe ona biti za sedam dana zdrava i da se onda moæe vratiti nazad u narod. zato mu je Bog dao uslov. Avimelek je ispunio Boæiji uslov. koji. Meœutim. Videvãi Mariju. Dakle iz ovog primera moæemo videti da je u starozavetno doba. Marija i Aron su gunœali protiv Mojsija jer im se nije svidelo ãto je uzeo æenu Madijanku. Zbog Avramovog kukaviåluka.govori o Boæijoj kazni za Mariju koja je gunœala protiv Mojsija kao Boæijeg proroka. Boæiji åovek. Meœutim. i æivot njegove porodice. Gospoda Boga je ovo gunœanje naljutilo. Avimelek je to uåinio iz neznanja. a zatim da se za njega pomoli Boæiji åovek ili prorok. ako izvrãi moæe da ozdravi i ostane æiv. vratio je Saru Avramu i joã mu je dao mnoge darove. Mojsije. bila je bela kao sneg. i da ñe zbog toga Avimelek poginuti. videlo se da se njegov gnev spustio na Mariju jer je ona bila gubava. Arona i Mojsija da doœu u ãator od sastanka. i to se i dogodilo. kao kaznu za greh davao bolest koja je vodila u smrt. Bog je. Avram se pomolio da Bog isceli Avimeleka i ceo njegov dom. Kada je Bog otiãao iz ãatora od sastanka. U Starom zavetu je vaæilo pravilo: ko zgreãi biñe kaænjen. da bi åovek ozdravio.

Isaija 38:1-5. 3. svi oni koje su ujedale zmije. u ovom sluåaju za Mariju. N° 9 pokajanje i molitva proroka. smilovao se Jezekiji. Narod Izraelski se spasao pogledom vere u zmiju koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao. bilo je bitno da se oni pokaju za svoj greh. pokajali su se ãto su gunœali i doãli su kod Mojsija moleñi ga da moli Gospoda da ukloni zmije od naroda. za bolesnu osobu. Mojsije se molio za to i Bog je sklonio zmije i rekao mu naåin na koji ñe ozdraviti oni koje su zmije ujele. Inaåe. Mojsije je napravio zmiju onakvu kakvu mu je Gospod zapovedio da napravi. bio je Bogu veran i celim srcem je åinio ono ãto je bilo Bogu ugodno. Jezekija je to posluãao i ozdravio je. . i zato ãto im se hleb ogadio. Isus je govorio da ñe i on biti podignut kao i ova zmija i da ñe svako ko poveruje u Njega biti spaãen (Jovan 3:14). Boæijeg åoveka.govori o tome kako se Bog smilovao na ljude koji su gunœali protiv njega i dao Mojsiju reãenje od bolesti. Zato je Jezekija u suzama molio Gospoda da mu se smiluje i da mu da da poæivi joã nekoliko godina. Isus je sebe uporedio sa ovom zmijom koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao da bi je svi videli. Brojevi 21:5-9 . a nisu se pokajali i prihvatili Boæije reãenje za ozdravljenje. Kada se Jezekija smrtno razboleo doãao mu je prorok Isaija i preneo mu poruku od Gospoda da ñe umreti. bio je ozdravljen. Znaåi. i preko proroka Isaije mu poruåio da ñe poæiveti joã petnaest godina. Meœutim. bez milosti su umirali. Gospod je to åuo pa je spustio svoj gnev na one koji su gunœali tako da je veliki broj ljudi pomreo od ujeda zmija. Izraelci su se bunili protiv Boga i Mojsija zbog toga ãto su ih izveli iz Misira. 4. U protivnom. da bi se on pomolio za njih i njihovo ozdravljenje. i svako ko je verom pogledao u tu zmiju. Kada su ostali videli ãta se deãava. a zatim da to kaæu Boæijem proroku. Jezekija je bio veoma poboæan. 21 . Isaija je rekao Jezekiji da uzme grudu suvih smokava i da stavi na mesto na kom je otok i da ñe tako ozdraviti.206 Teoloãki åasopis.govori o Jezekijinoj smrtnoj bolesti i isceljenju te bolesti jer je Bog odluåio da Jezekija poæivi joã petnaest godina. Gospod je åuo tu molitvu.

Kada je isceljivao. posledica greha. Smatram da ñemo tada imati jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. ãta je radio. da bolesti naãe nosi i nemoñi naãe uzme (Is. Bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja Novi zavet na mnogo mesta govori o bolestima i njihovim isceljenjima. ipak bismo mogli pretpostaviti da su u pitanju bili gresi koje je ranije poåinio jer u sedamnaestom stihu Jezekija kaæe da je Gospod “bacio za leœa svoja sve grijehe moje”. Sveto pismo nam indirektno govori da je najznaåajnije videti kako se Isus postavljao prema bolestima. On je posedovao tu silu i nije imao potrebu da se poziva na neki autoritet. 8:46). bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja nam daju joã jasniju i bogatiju sliku o uzrocima i razlozima bolesti i naåinima isceljenja bolesnih od strane Isusa Hrista i njegovih uåenika. drugim reåima. videti kako su koristili Isusov autoritet i njegovu moñ da bi iscelili bolesne. Uglavnom je bolest bila kazna za greh.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 207 Ovaj dogaœaj je Jezekija zapisao u svojoj knjizi (38:9-20). 53). 53:4). Isus je imao taj autoritet i narod je to primeñivao. U Luki 5:17 je zapisano da je Isus leåio silom Gospodnjom. Ali. Isus i bolesti u evanœelju po Luki Za Isusa Hrista je najavljeno da ñe isceliti mnoge kada bude doãao na ovu zemlju (Is. On je doãao da oslobodi suænje. kako je koristio svoj autoritet i svoju moñ kada je isceljivao bolesne. Isusova sluæba je bila puna takvih dogaœaja. ukoliko su se bolesni pokajali i ukoliko se Boæiji åovek molio za njih. . znaåajno je videti kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima. Iako nije jasno reåeno koji je bio uzrok Jezekijine bolesti. Moguñe je da je i u ovom sluåaju greh bio uzrok bolesti. kako je isceljivao bolesne tj. Bog je i u Starom zavetu imao milosti prema greãnima pa je. Meœutim. Nadalje. 4:36). Mislim da smo analizirajuñi ova åetiri primera dobili jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja. On je imao veliku moñ i ljudi su se zaprepaãñivali jer je åinio pred njima åuda isceljenja i izgonio demone (Lk. To je i radio. ta je sila izlazila iz Njega (Lk. Dakle. bili ozdravljani.

Isus je doãao u Petrovu kuñu. U ovoj situaciji su mu naroåito trebali ljudi koji bi ga odneli do Isusa. Poãto je bila velika guæva. Isus je video njihovu veru i ozdravio åoveka.2 Iako su tu bili prisutni fariseji. imala je groznicu. a ne o bolesti. a tri ñu detaljnije analizirati.3 Moæda neki smatraju da 1 2 3 Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. 2. N° 9 U nastavku ñu navesti trinaest neposrednih Isusovih izleåenja bolesnih. sve ñu ih ukratko prokomentarisati. 115. Kod ovog bolesnika uzrok bolesti je na prvom mestu bio greh. 39 – isceljenje Petrove taãte. Isus je rekao: åoveåe.1 Reåi nisu bile izgovorene ali je sam åin bio nema molba. 23. 989. Isus je rekao ono ãto je moralo da se uradi. On to nije namerno uradio da bi se prepirao sa farisejima. 1. ali to ne implicira da je greh uzrok svaåije bolesti. odnosno da su svi bolesni kaænjeni jer su poåili mnogo greha. Autoritativno se izraæavajuñi. Manson smatra da “ono ãto je taj dogaœaj u prvom redu trebao istaknuti jeste upravo åinjenica da Isusov autoritet u podruåju vere poåinje opraãtanjem greha”. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Isus se nije osvrtao na njih iako je znao da su oni tu da bi ga uhvatili u pogreãci. Petrova taãta je bila bolesna. jer je to bilo reãenje. 25 – isceljenje uzetoga. Ovom bolesniku su bili potrebni ljudi koji bi ga nosili ako bi trebao negde da ode. Moris: 1983: str. opraãtaju ti se gresi. . 5:18-20.208 Teoloãki åasopis. veñ je to uradio da bi paralisani åovek mogao da bude isceljen. 24. Isusa je zadivila vera njegovih prijatelja. 4:38. trebalo je prvo oprostiti grehe. Isusove prve reåi u ovom dogaœaju govore o grehu. Isus se nagnuo nad njom i zapretio groznici. njegovi prijatelji su trebali imati veliku veru u Isusa da bi raskopali krov od kuñe i spustili bolesnika pred Isusa. Petrova taãta je ustala zdrava i posluæivala ih je.

Jovana. Luka nam ovde ne kaæe. 8:43-48 – isceljenje krvotoåive æene. Odeljak Lk. Zbog toga ãto je znao misli fariseja i knjiæevnika. Susana i mnoge druge koje ne spominju Evanœelja. Meœu njima su bile Marija Magdalena. poruåio da on nije dostojan da Isus uœe u njegovu kuñu niti da on sam doœe pred njega. 6:6-10 – isceljenje åoveka sa suvom rukom. Ljudima ne preostaje niãta drugo nego da pogledom vere gledaju na Onog koji je Lekar nad lekarima. na koje nije bilo odgovora. ujedno. . Ovo ne znaåi da ljudi ne trebaju iñi kod lekara. Kapetan je poruåio da je dovoljna samo jedn Isusova reå i njegov ñe sluga biti zdrav. pozvao je åoveka sa bolesnom rukom da stane na sredinu sinagoge. da se ona mnogo namuåila dok se leåila kod lekara jer je to za Luku koji je i sam bio lekar bilo sasvim normalno da je ta æena tako prolazila. verujuñi da Isus moæe isceliti njegovog slugu. 15:25). Isus je bio zadivljen kapetanovom verom. ali mu je. 160. 7:1-10 – isceljenje kapetanovog sluge. 6. Ova æena je iãla kod 4 Vidi: Moris: 1983: str. Dok je Isus jedne subote uåio u sinagogi zapazio je åoveka sa suvom desnom rukom. Nekada bolesnici idu kod lekara i potroãe svoje imanje da bi bili izleåeni ali ne vredi. 5. 8:43-48 nam govori o isceljenju krvotoåive æene. 13:1-5). Nakon jednog Isusovog pitanja. Isus je reåju iscelio suvu ruku tom åoveku rekavãi: “pruæi svoju ruku”. Kapetan rimske vojske je.4 Luka se usredsreœuje na samo isceljenje.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 209 greh obavezno donosi neku bolest. Mislim da je to moguñe ali to ne mora da bude pravilo (Vidi Lk. pozvao Isusa da to uåini. na Isusa. kao ãto to evanœelista Marko kaæe. Ona je doæivljavala mnoge neugodnosti jer su je smatrali neåistom zbog krvarenja (Lev. Ovaj tekst govori o Isusovim sledbenicama koje je Isus izleåio od zlih duhova i bolesti. Tako je i bilo. 3. 8:2-3 – Isus je isceljivao i nespomenute u Evanœeljima. 4.

Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. 15:27). Zato. . 11:14 – izgoni demona i nemi progovara. Æeleo je da se ova æena predstavi i da joj da na znanje da njegova odeña nema nikakvo magiåno dejstvo. U ovom stihu se govori o joã jednom primeru Isusove sile i autoriteta. Sotona ju 5 6 7 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. a bavljenje takvim poslom na ãabat je bilo zabranjeno. Ova æena koja nije mogla.5 Naravno. stareãina sinagoge nije mogao da vidi dalje od propisane norme i da u ozdravljenju zgråene æene ugleda Isusovu samilost.6 7. veñ da je njena vera u Njega ta koja ju je iscelila. Dakle. priãla mu je u veri æeleñi tajno da se dotakne Njega i bude isceljena. Dok su deåaka dovodili Isusu demon je bacio deåaka na zemlju i poåeo da ga trza. vera joj je pomogla i bila je isceljena.210 Teoloãki åasopis. posle svih neuspeha ona je doãla do Isusa. Nije hteo da to ostane samo izmeœu njih. 52. N° 9 lekara ali nije vredelo. Isus je æeleo da ta æena da svedoåanstvo pred svima. Isus je isterao neåistog duha i na taj naåin izleåio deåaka. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. Ona je bila Avramova kñer ali je njena bolest bila zla. Deåak je imao padavicu jer ga je neåisti duh bacao na zemlju. priñi Isusu otvoreno. 35. 9:38-42 – isceljenje mladiña koji ima padavicu. 13:10-13 – isceljena æena koja je 18 godina pogrbljena je moj treñi detaljniji primer koji koristim u ovoj analizi.7 Niãta ne upuñuje na pretpostavku da je ta æena verovala u Isusa. 8. zbog zakona (Lev. idi s mirom”. vera tvoja spasla te je. 9. Isus je silazio sa gore preobraæenja i naiãao na åoveka koji ga je zamolio da mu isceli sina. Religiozne voœe su smatrale da je isceljenje lekarski posao. 995. Isus je isterao demona iz nemog åoveka i åovek je progovorio. Ovaj dogaœaj je narod zadivio a zavidne posmatraåe odveo u drugi ekstrem. isti sluåaj moæe biti sa nekima od nas. “kñeri.

Prilikom isterivanja demona. poloæio je svoje ruke na nju i ona se odmah ispravila. Ova bolest je bila prouzrokovana demonom koji ju je dræao zgråenom. Petar je napao prvosveãtenikovog slugu i odsekao mu je desno uvo. Isus uglavnom nije polagao ruke na bolesnike. slavio je Boga i vratio se da zahvali Isusu. 51 – isceljenje uva prvosveãtenikovog sluge. povikao iz sveg glasa da se Isus smiluje nad njim. U toj kuñi je bio åovek koji je patio od vodene bolesti.9 10. Isus se smilovao na slugu. uzroånika bolesti. priãao mu. komentariãuñi da ga je spasla njegova vera. 1003. slepac je zatraæio da Isus uåini da on progleda. 17:12-14 – isceljenje deset gubavaca. U ovih trinaest primera mogli smo videti Isusa i Njegovu postavku prema duhovnim aspektima bolesti. 18:35-43 – isceljenje jerihonskog slepca. 12. Isus je jedne subote bio gost u kuñi farisejskog stareãine.8 Isus je æenu proglasio isceljenom. Kada su ga doveli do Isusa. Mislim da su ovi primeri dovoljno pouåni da bismo ovo shvatili: Isus je Lekar nad 8 9 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Moris: 1983: str. Kada su prvosveãtenikove sluge doãle po Isusa da bi ga priveli. Isus se smilovao nad njim i reåju ga izleåio. videvãi ãta se deãava. 22:50. . 13. “Moæda Luka æeli reñi da je u tom trenutku ona veñ od tog duha (11) bila osloboœena (12). Na putu za Jerihon Isus je prolazio pored jednog slepca. Isus im je dao reå da ñe biti oåiãñeni na putu do sveãtenika kojima su trebali da se pokaæu. Na putu izmeœu Samarije i Galileje. Isus ga je izleåio dohvatom nakon neodgovorenog pitanja: “da li se sme subotom leåiti?” 11. åuvãi da Isus prolazi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 211 je svezao. 14:1-4 – isceljenje åoveka koji ima vodenu bolest. Slepac je. Jedan od njih je video da je izleåen. te da je Isus samo dovrãio isceljenje”. Isusa je srelo deset gubavaca koji su izdaleka podigli glas molbe da se on smiluje na njih. i dotaknuo njegovo uvo. 229. Iscelio je slugino uvo bez da ga je sluga to zamolilo.

starosti ili nemoñi tela. ko veruje u mene åiniñe dela koja ja åinim. u Isusovo ime. Stoga. Zato. 3:1-16 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja. 14:12-14). nekada opraãta grehe pa isceljuje. u svim ovim primerima vidimo da je potrebna vera u Isusa Hrista. da se dogode i åuda. da se proslavi Otac u Sinu. kada govorimo o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja ne smemo izostaviti apostole (uåenike Hristove) i njihove postavke prema bolestima. Apostoli i bolesti U ovom delu rada bih hteo da kaæem neãto o tome kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima i ãta su åinili po pitanju toga jer Isus je rekao uåenicima: “Zaista. treba da verujemo da Isus oåekuje da mi idemo kod lekara koji ñe nas izleåiti od bolesti koje nisu izazvane od strane neåistih sila veñ zbog naãe nemarnosti oko oåuvanja zdravlja. Petrovo “pogledaj u nas” pojaåava napetost. 10:17-19. i ãto god zaiãtete u moje ime. Isus je otiãao Ocu i od onda pa do danas Hristovi sledbenici. to ñu uåiniti. naglasak je moj). Jvn. ja ñu uåiniti” (Jovan 14:12-14. i veña od ovih. zaista. kaæem vam. Najverodostojnije i najjaåe dokaze o ovoj Isusovoj izjavi moæemo nañi u knjizi Dela apostolskih. Kada je prizvano Isusovo ime da isceli bolest. ovde se æelim osvrnuti na ãest dogaœaja apostolskih izleåenja bolesnih opisanih u ovoj knjizi. nekada izgoni demone i isceljuje. mogu zatraæiti od Oca. jer ja idem k Ocu. Apostol Petar i Jovan glavne su liånosti ovog dogaœaja. N° 9 lekarima. . verovati u Njegovu moñ isceljivanja.212 Teoloãki åasopis. Ovo je velika istina. iako je u njemu Isus Nazareñanin ipak najvaæniji uåesnik. Takoœe. åetiri ñu analizirati a dva ñu samo prokomentarisati: 1. a Luka tako uokviravajuñi ozdravljenje uspeva izazvati najsnaæniji utisak kod åitatelja. Nekada samo isceljuje. verujuñi u Njegovo ime. Meœutim. Isus je dao autoritet svojim uåenicima da u Njegovo ime åine joã veña åuda od onih koja je i On sam åinio dok je æiveo na zemlji (Lk. Ako me ãto zamolite u moje ime.

1075. Apostoli nisu isceljivali svojom sopstvenom silom.11 “Hriãñani imaju neãto mnogo bolje ãto mogu da podele. Åuda ãto su ovde navedena nadilaze ona kojima su nas do sad obavestila Dela apostolska.10 “U ime Isusa iz Nazareta” znaåi “autoritetom Isusa Hrista”. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str.15 10 10 11 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. ili autoritet. stekli su poãtovanje. 54. 11. …”i vera – do koje dolazimo njegovim posredstvom – dala mu je potpuno zdravlje pred svima vama”. To je upravo ono ãto je Petar imao ( i dao) . bili su isceljeni. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Carson: 1994: str. 75. ko mu je dao autoritet i moñ da isceljuje. Koristeñi Isusovo ime. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str.posveñenje koje dolazi kroz veru u ime. Isusa Hrista”12 Odgovor koji je dao apostol Petar u Delima 4:8-10 je jednak odgovoru koji je dao u Delima 4:16. 5:12-16 – Isus je kroz apostole leåio bolesnike. propovedala reå.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 213 onda je moñno Isusovo ime poåelo delovati. U ovom odeljku se govori o mnogim åudima koja su se zbivala preko apostolskih ruku. i to ne Petrovom senkom. sila Boæija se kroz njih pokazivala u mnogim znacima i åudima. Petar je dao do znanja. i reåima i delom. 15. Njegovo ime koje ne samo ãto opraãta (Dela 2:38). 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 . Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. nego i ozdravlja.13 Ljudi koji bi proãli pored Petrove senke ili ako je ona padala na bolesnike. Ova åuda su oåitovala silu Mesije koji je bio razapet i vaskrsnut iz mrtvih i koji je i u ovakvim trenucima bio sa uåenicima. Ovde se priseñamo masovnih ozdravljenja koja je Isus pre åinio. ovde vidimo da se ispunila molitva apostola iz Dela 4:29-30.14 Zapravo. veñ Boæijom silom koja je delovala kroz Petra. veñ silom Duha Svetog. Dogaœala su se åuda. 2. 1073.

Åuda su imala znaåajnu ulogu u Isusovom delovanju (Dl. kod åuda koja je Isus åinio17 (“. Jedan uåenik po imenu Ananija. N° 9 3. 9:8-18 – Pavle je progledao nakon nekog vremena. Verovatno je Pavle to uåinio u Isusovo ime da hromi prohoda iako to u tekstu nije jasno spomenuto. 221. nas ne treba da iznenadi to da Bog moæe da isceljuje. 5:13. 12 – Bog åini velika isceljenja i åuda kroz Pavla. Luka je ovo zapisao namerno jer je smatrao da ova åuda nisu “obiåna”. veñ nas u ovom sluåaju pomalo iznenaœuje Lukin izveãtaj o naåinu isceljenja koji ne nalazimo ni u evanœeljima. 9:12. samo je Bog sada åinio åuda kroz Pavla. Meœutim. Pavle je zapazio hromog åoveka kako pomno prati njegov govor i kako ima veru u spasenje. Buduñi da je Pavle bio posrednik u izvrãenju Boæijih åuda. Ove reåi sadræe opis nesvakidaãnjih hriãñanskih åudesa. 6:19. bilo je logiåno da ta odeña nema snagu dok ne dotakne apostolovo telo. 14:8-10 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja kroz Pavla. 16 16 17 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. 22:51. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. dolazi do Pavla nakon nekoliko dana i polaæe ruke na njega da u ime Isusa progleda i ispuni se Duhom. 19:11. 5:12. 14:3).. Brojna åuda u Novom zavetu su zavisila. 9:6. 17 . baã kao i ovde.7.dela koja ja åinim. 15. Sa nekog rastojanja mu je snaænim glasom rekao da ustane.16 Drugo.214 Teoloãki åasopis. Ovaj odeljak nam govori o istom sluåaju kao i sa Petrom u 5:12-16. 13:13. 5. 1096. Kada se apostol Pavle prvi put sreo sa vaskrslim Hristom na putu za Damask privremeno je ostao slep. 4. 8:54. o upotrebi nekog predmeta i dodira (Lk. 2:22 i 10:38). i veña od ovih…”). ova åuda su se odigrala u mestu u kojem je bilo mnogo crne magije i okultizma. U takvom mestu je Bog pokazao svoju silu kroz Pavla åinivãi neobiåna åuda. Jvn. 4:40. Dl. Ljudi su pokuãavali uz pomoñ nekih magijskih formula da pokuãaju da åine åuda.

danas ñemo prvenstveno pomisliti na lekare i traæiñemo njihovo miãljenje. Samo na ovom putovanju.20 Implikacije Kada su bolesti u pitanju. bolest bude tretirana na duhovni naåin. iako tekst ne govori o tome. åak i u poloæaju brodolomnika u okovima. onda treba da. ako posmatramo kompletno ljudsko biñe.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 215 6. treba se moliti za isceljenje da Bog ozdravi tu osobu. kao i mnoge druge. 18 18 19 Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. ozdravljenje je doãlo kroz molitvu i polaganje Pavlovih ruku na bolesnika. vaæno mi je da napomenem da. dijagnoze i terapije. Moæemo pretpostaviti da su Pavle i drugi hriãñani propovedali dobru vest i imali nekoliko uspeha.1199 Meœutim. Svrhu bolesti nalazim u duhovnoj oblasti i zato smatram da nije dovoljno samo se fokusirati i leåiti fiziåke aspekte bolesti. snaæno je uzdrmao æivote kapetana. ukoliko vidimo jasan duhovni uzrok bolesti. Ovim istraæivanjem æelim da ukaæem da. 293. glavnog zvaniånika Malte. imao je groznicu i srdobolju. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. govori se samo da su bili poåaãñeni na mnoge naåine. za koje åak smatram da su prioritetniji. Pavlova molitva i polaganje ruku izleåili su ga. Zbog toga. Ovo ozdravljenje je privuklo mnoge da doœu kod Pavla iz istog razloga. samo ili prvenstveno. Bog je sve ovo vodio i uåinio da Pavle i ostali sa broda budu dobro snabdeveni za put do Rima. sem fiziåkih. 18 Otac ovog malteãkog vladara je bio bolestan. 19 20 20 . 28:7-9 – Pavle se moli za Pubijevog oca i on biva isceljen kao i mnogi drugi bolesnici na Malti. Ne znamo da li Luka ovde implicira egzorcizam. Neki pisci komentrara misle da ih je izleåio lekar Luka koji je bio sa Pavlom. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. 81. i oni su ozdravljali. 1106. postoje i duhovni aspetki bolesti. Pavle je nastavio da sluæi drugima. Ne znamo jer se ne spominju zli duhovi kod sluåaja ove bolesti.

Greh je uzrok bolesti. Pavle objaãnjava da neki u Korintu su slabi i bolesni zato ãto je njihov greh bio to ãto nisu 21 21 22 Vidi: Oropeza: 2001: str. 8:7). izbegavam ovde da generalizujem ili da iznosim neke zakljuåke koji bi u ovoj oblasti doveli do neke vrste iskljuåivosti. ovde su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. 9:14-29. Demoni mogu biti uzrok bolesti. 7:21. “ne tvrdim da je svaki duhovni problem rezultat direktne demonske aktivnosti. padavice ili drugih bolesti uzrok delovanje demona. Zato. 17:14-21. Ali moæeã biti u ropstvu jer si previdio ili zanijekao realnost demonskih sila koje su na djelu u danaãnjem svijetu”. 8:28-34. Mk. 68. neizobraæenih ljudi napravilo je viãe ãtete nego dobra prepoznavajuñi demone ondje gdje ih nije bilo”. moæemo se zapitati sledeñe: da li su demoni uzrok bolesti? Novi zavet navodi mnoge primere gde su demoni uzroånici bolesti. 1:34. Kada dr Peter H. pa åak i duhovnog fanatizma. 9:32-34. ali ne smemo misliti da je u svakom sluåaju slepoñe. 22 23 23 . Mt. Previãe revnih. 5:16. “nemojte pobrkati duãevni poremeñaj s demonom. 9:37-43). 115. Oropeza citira Basil Jackson: Oropeza: 2001: str. Lk. Ovo se moæe izbeñi ako se osoba uputi na odgovarajuñe psihijatrijsko leåenje.22 Kada su u pitanju duãevne bolesti. Isterivao je demone iz slepih i nemih (Mt.23 Pogreãna dijagnoza opsednutosti demonima moæe imati katastrofalne posledice na nekoga ko je duãevno ili emocionalno bolestan pa to moæe uzrokovati snaæan oseñaj krivice i oseñaj da ih je Bog odbacio. 69. 5:1-20. on ustanovljava tri uzroka bolesti: greh.13. Isceljivanje bolesti i izgon demona nije uvek jedno te isto (Mk. 12:22. Lk.216 Teoloãki åasopis. Kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Mk. N° 9 Dakle. 11:14-15) i iz onih poremeñena uma (Mt. U I Kor. Dl. 11:30. 33. Isus je iz deåaka isterao demona padavice (Mt. Bog i demonske sile. 8:26-39). Davids govori u knjizi “Wrestiling with dark angels”o bolestima s duhovnih aspekata. Lk.21 Slaæem se sa Andersonom. Lk. Anderson:2002: str. Zaista trebam odgovore na ovakva pitanja i verujem da se odgovor razlikuje od sluåaja do sluåaja. 8:16.

Meœutim. Gresi neopraãtanja i nepomirenja. i joã neki mogu se direktno putem Duha Svetoga dovesti u vezu kod nekih osoba koje su zgreãile i obolele. i to je Boæiji dar. Varisus (Dl. Verujem. 12:20-23). Demonske sile su uzrok bolesti.24 Dimitrije Kaleziñ smatra da je ljudsko biñe inficirano grehom i da je greh najåeãñi uzrok bolesti (neåiste sile ni ne spominje). Ako je greh uzrok bolesti. 11). 25 . Ljudska istraæivanja o raznim bolestima i o njihovom leåenju su dostigla visok nivo. uzeo bih to kao izuzetke ali ne i kao pravilo. 5:5. Zato smatram da je potrebno otiñi kod lekara i posavetovati se sa 24 24 25 Vidi: Wagner: 1990: str. 15:5) a i u Novom zavetu: Irod Agripa (Dl. Milaãinoviñ: 1995: str. Pavle zapoveda crkvama da odbace sramne greãnike koje ñe Satana uzeti za “propast tela”. 13:6-12). vraåarstva i idolopoklonstva. Korinñani (I Kor. U I Kor. da li je Bog ikada uzrok bolesti? U Starom zavetu jeste (II Kr. Mada. Smatram da Bog dozvoljava bolest zbog odreœenog cilja. ne bih se sasvim sloæio sa dr Davidson u vezi toga da je Bog uzrok bolesti. Luka 13:10-17 govori o æeni koja je zgråena oko 18 godina od “duha bolesti”. 121-124. gresi neverja poput odbacivanja milostivoga Boga ili ravnoduãnosti. smatram da Bog ponekad interveniãe i na taj naåin. lakomstva. kao ãto je i dr Davidson naveo neke svetopisamske primere. Zato nam je od velike pomoñi klasiåna medicina koja u danaãnje vreme åini skoro åuda. i samo zdravlje”.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 217 uvaæavali jedinstvo u Telu kao Gospodnju veåeru. Ljudsko telo koje je Bog savrãeno stvorio nakon pada u greh ne funkcioniãe onako kako ga je Bog naåinio da funkcioniãe. Meœutim. Bog je uzrok bolesti. U Novom zavetu su demoske sile viãe u vezi sa bolestima nego ãto je Bog. On smatra da do isceljenja od takve bolesti se dolazi ako je åovekova liånost okrenuta “Bogu radi unutraãnje ili mistiåne saradnje – to je uslov za zdravlje. 218-221. kao u sluåaju Jova da je Bog dozvolio Satani da iskuãa Jova i na taj naåin.25 Istina je da je ljusko biñe zbog pada u greh postalo podloæno mnogim vrstama bolesti.

Strikoviñem. bolest moæe biti samo prosto oboljenje neåega. nemojmo uvek smatrati da je u pitanju neki demon jer je vrlo lako moguñe da je u pitanju samo neka telesna bolest koju ñe lekari reãiti bez ikakve muke. pa neka se pomole nad njim i pomaæu ga uljem u ime Gospodnje. Slaæem se sa dr Jovanom N. Trebamo molitvom priñi Bogu i traæiti vodstvo Svetoga Duha da nam razjasni i da silu da reãimo odreœenu situaciju kada je bolest u pitanju. 26 Sveto pismo nam kaæe ãta da åinimo kada su u pitanju bolesti: “Boluje li ko meœu vama? Neka dozove crkvene stareãine. Ispovedajte. trebamo koristititi i taj Boæiji dar. Zakljuåio bih da ne bi bilo mudro da pokuãamo da gradimo bilo kakvu generalizaciju o bolestima na osnovu izabranih svetopisamskih odlomaka. Kada razmiãljam o duhovnim aspektima bolesti mislim samo na jedno reãenje: vera u Isusa Hrista. dakle. 26 . koje u svojoj alebiciji hoñe da nas usreñe.218 Teoloãki åasopis. smatram da je ona od œavola iako se pokazuje kao pozitivna. sile i one druge. Inaåe. ne izleåe åoveka. Izmeœu ostalog. odnosno unesreñe”. kao moñnog Isceljitelja. “dobronamerna”. S druge strane. pre svega. Ãto se tiåe bele magije. Religiozna oseñanja. Drugim reåima. smatram da tu nema nikakve druge ãanse da se åovek izleåi na ispravan naåin. jedan drugome grehe i molite se Bogu 26 Milaãinoviñ: 1995: Unutraãnja stranica na poleœinskoj korici knjige. N° 9 njima kada smo bolesni. kroz krizu verovanja. da pravimo neki univerzalni duhovni recept. biñe mu oproãteno. ako je neko bolestan i ne moæe da ozdravi treba da zna da je duãa vaænija od tela i da treba da se mnogo viãe fokusira na spasenje svoje duãe kroz veru u Isusa Hrista. “kriza savremene civilizacije prepoznaje se. kao imanentna potreba i spiritus movens naãe egzistencije jesu tvrœava na koje su kidisale sile neåastive. I molitva vere spaãñe bolesnika. Bela magija pokuãava da otkloni bolest jer ne moæe da izleåi åoveka. ako je i uåinio grehe. kao Boæiji dar. Ukoliko Bog i klasiåna medicina. i Gospod ñe ga podiñi.

Lee Ash Antony 1986 Djela apostolska: tumaåenje Djela apostolskih. 1994 New bible commentary. posredniåka delotvorna molitva pravednika i isceljivanje u ime Gospodnje (u ime Isusa Hrista). ur. . voleti. Zaista. 5:14-16 naglasci su moji!). Downers Grove. da budete isceljeni. CITIRANA DELA Anderson T.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 219 jedan za drugoga. Ovo je po mom miãljenju prvi korak kada su u pitanju bolesti. 27 27 Isto. Dæejms 1999 Luka: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. Zato trebamo znati da “smisao naãeg æivota i æivljenja nije u onom smislu koji ñe odrediti neko drugi veñ u egzistenciji vere. usvojiti bez prisustva vere. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije.” (Jak. Galvin C. niãta se ne moæe razumeti. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. ispovedanje greha. Daruvar. Neil 2002 On lomi okove. Hrvatska: Logos Daruvar. A. kojom se oznaåava vrhunska strast kao vera. Carson D. su za mene prvi i kljuåni postupci pri ozdravljenju ili isceljenju bolesnika. Illinois: IVP. Ovi stihovi nam govore kako da najpravilnije postupimo da ne bismo napravili katastrofalne greãke. prihvatiti. Molitva vere. Mnogo moæe delotvorna molitva pravednika. Ne moæe se ni opstati ni ostati bez njenog udela!”27 Vera je kljuå.

A.M.220 Teoloãki åasopis. Åarniña. Ventura. demonima i duhovnom ratovanju: 99 pitanja i odgovora. 2000 O anœelima. Verman R. Peter 1990 Wrestling with dark angels. U. Javier. N° 9 Milaãinoviñ Jasmina 1995 Religija i duãevni æivot åoveka. Hrvatska: STEPress. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. IZDANJE BIBLIJSKOG DRUÃTVA BEOGRAD. Zagreb.S. Wagner C. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. Novi zavet: prevod dr Emilijana M.: Regal Books. Beograd: ZAVOD ZA BOLESTI ZAVISNOSTI I PARTENON M. David 2001 Dela apostolska: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje.A. Kalifornija. . Moris Leon 1983 Luka: tumaåenje Evanœelja po Luki. Oropeza B.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful